OWS was disproportionately affluent young white males

[struggle4progress]

http://sps.cuny.edu/filestore/1/5/7/1_a05051d2117901d/1571_92f562221b8041e.pdf

See Figure 1 (p 10) and Appendix C (p 47)

[MannyGoldstein]

1. I guess that group has *some * value to society?

[struggle4progress]

10. I guess that's indeed possible

[Eleanors38]

156. Yeah, 2 things: (1) Gripe at 'em; (2) Gripe at 'em while asking for a donation.

[Bonobo]

2. Students are often leaders of protests for similar reasons.

Spending time protesting requires a certain amount of resources.

One needs to have time off from work, or the money to take such time off, transportation and other resources often unavailable to more unfortunate people.

Would you have white men NOT protest?

[Comrade Grumpy]

3. Is there a point you're trying to make?

[Scootaloo]

9. Another of the poster's attempts to snipe at the left

One wonders whose progress they're struggling 4

[QC]

98. +1

[struggle4progress]

11. Before chanting "We are the 99%!" it might have been good

to reach out to women, hispanics, blacks, blue collar and service workers, and so on

[Hekate]

15. How do you know they didn't? On what evidence?

You're doing some fine s*t stirring there, but let me point out that many people cannot leave their minimum wage jobs or their children to go camping in a city park.

In addition, it should be counted a very worthy endeavor for those who CAN speak out to do so for those who CANNOT.

[sabrina 1]

34. See my post #18. This is totally false. Just an attempt to smear Sanders in a very underhanded way.

But since it's provably false, it wasn't a very good effort. Just makes their candidate look bad imo.

[neverforget]

37. Of course. There are at least 3 threads about OWS and Bernie today and this one shows up

See post #13 for the links to those threads

[madokie]

78. Yup

[Zorra]

47. Rev. Jesse Jackson came to our group in downtown Phoenix at

9:30 in the evening one night. We were on the sidewalk next to Chavez Plaza. Before that, we were waiting to get some of our sisters and brothers out of jail. Some of us stayed at the jail, others got tired of waiting and went back to our sidewalk camp by the park.

So we're just sitting there, about 20 of us discussing making a water run, when Jesse walks up to us with a bunch of labor leaders of COBTU. (Coalition of Black Trade Unionists). He told us he thought it was really great what we were doing. He talked about Dr. King, and the civil rights movements and marches. He thanked us for doing what we were doing, and told us how important it was. He gave me a hug. It was a big thing for me, because Jesse, Dr. King, Rev. Abernathy, and other leaders of the civil rights movement are about as close to heroes as I have. He talked for awhile and told us never to give up.

Then he asked us if we would mind if he marched with us the next day.

Rev. Jackson is a good man. I'm sure your racist, race baiting post would make Rev. Jackson sad and disgusted, and I imagine if he read your posts, he would wonder why you bothered even associating with the Democratic party.

You see, struggle4progress, I was really right there. I was there watching my sisters and brothers of all races getting pepper sprayed, and taken to the ground with their faces in the asphalt. I washed the pepper spray from the eyes of my sisters and brothers. I didn't get harmed during Occupy, I got lucky; I was right next to people who did.

Much of what you post here is so far to the right it disgusts me almost beyond my capacity to bear, I had you on ignore for a long time, and you will be going back to ignore after this post. Occupy reached out to everyone. All were welcome as equals. We didn't outreach to anyone. We figured all the people who really cared would show up. No one was turned away. We took care of each other, but we weren't babysitters. We had very important things to do.

I'm going to post the youtube video of what Rev. Jackson said to us the next, and led us in singing "We Shall Overcome". Familiar with the history of the tune?

You may want to cover your eyes and ears, because this may upset you, and not in a good way. But if you do decide to listen, listen carefully, and hopefully you will learn something good

[Luminous Animal]

131. Lovely post.

[Chathamization]

157. He also showed up at an Occupy event I was at in D.C. I wonder how many he went to? N/T

[KingCharlemagne]

96. WTF? I was at Occupy Los Angeles on weekends during October and

November 2011. The OLA camp was open to anyone who wished to join. (On November 28, for example, an estimated 4,000 people were there, enough to scare Villain-raigosa and his LAPD thugs into backing off from smashing the camp.)

I don't know what in the fuck you are talking about and I'm certainly not going to click on some skeezy link you post without any explication.

[Ken Burch]

127. They constantly reached out to those groups.

A fair amount of them were FROM those groups.

[neverforget]

13. I wonder if it has something to do with this?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026603526

and this one

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026605883

and another

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026602875

Hmmmm

[struggle4progress]

28. The OP subject lines do raise the question:

How exactly can an unorganized movement possibly endorse anyone?

[sabrina 1]

36. The answer to that questions here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026603526

Your OP is totally false, and if I were you I would delete it.

If not, then we will have to post the facts.

If you don't like Bernie, then explain why, but this is not the way to make your candidate look good, that's for sure.

[Warren Stupidity]

138. good luck with that request.

[KingCharlemagne]

95. +Infinity! - nt

[Cheese Sandwich]

4. Why are you saying this?

[Lancero]

14. Stir up infighting.

Some would love nothing more then to paint the movement as overly privileged or racist because that would lead to a lot of infighting amongst supporters, and thus weakening the movement.

The 1%'s favorite tactic, divide and conquer.

[struggle4progress]

16. It's an interesting report. Over 40% of OWS consisted of people

who called themselves "independent" without leaning R or D, or who had third party affiliation or no party affiliation: See Table 3 (p 16)

Less than 80% planned to vote in 2012; only 63% planned to vote for Obama in 2012; and only 27% planned to be active in a political campaign in 2012: See Figures 3 and 4 (p 20)

I don't know where anyone got the idea that chanting "we are the 99%" could replace a definite platform or objective-driven organizing or voting -- but such attitudes have cost us much precious ground in the last few years, because we can often win elections simply through turnout.

[Cheese Sandwich]

17. The study you linked is trash.

As I posted below, the authors' numbers are based on a survey at a single event on May 1, 2012. They collected all their survey results at a single event. It's not representative of the OWS movement. A survey taken on a different day or a different neighborhood would give wildly different results.

From page 1:

We investigated those questions through
in-depth interviews with 25 core Occupy activists as
well as a representative survey of 729 people who
participated in an OWS-sponsored May 1, 2012 rally
and march. Our research is confined to New York City,
where the movement began and home to its main
target: Wall Street.

OWS had lots different subgroups doing stuff like fighting evictions and foreclosures, doing hurricane relief, challenging stop-and-frisk searches, all kinds of stuff. You're trying to characterize one of the most important social justice movements in recent history as a white boys club.

[struggle4progress]

32. Since the report is from professional researchers at CUNY, who were sympathetic to OWS

and managed to survey over 700 people, perhaps "trash" isn't exactly the right word

[Cheese Sandwich]

40. This study is not even close to a representative sample of OWS

This would be like if I wanted to take a sample of DU but only sampled one of the sub-groups.

[Exilednight]

153. Trash is the right word. It would be equivalent to

Polling only people in Miami to see how the entire south is going to vote.

[sabrina 1]

21. And it's a lie. See my post #18 for the truth about the great work AAs contributed to OWS. Shame on

you for trying to dismiss their work, still ongoing. But that is the way it is in the good old US when it comes to AAs, they are invisible to a lot of people.

WELL NOT TO OWS! They were a huge part of the movement, all over the country.

I guess I'll have to write an OP to make sure they get the credit the right wing corporate media tried to deny them.

[magical thyme]

84. they didn't vote because they had given up on the system.

Not because they were apathetic.

They were pushing to totally walk away from a totally rigged, corrupt, bought-and-paid-for system, which is a valid response.

"...such attitudes have cost us much precious ground in the last few years,"

Bullshit. They haven't cost anybody "precious ground." They are responsible for the current dialog about the obscene concentration of wealth in the hands of the few. Since that discussion is now front and center for 2016, they have made a huge difference.

[struggle4progress]

89. You should regard real politics as an experimental science: you learn how to do things

by trying to do specific things and learning from your mistakes.

"Walking away" because "the system is totally rigged, corrupt, bought-and-paid-for" is not high0-minded but simply lazy and self-indulgent, and "apathy" seems an appropriate description

[magical thyme]

115. b.s. again. They learned and morphed into groups that provide aid, as I've detailed in other posts.

And by endorsing Bernie Sanders, they appear to be getting politically active as well.

Btw, your attempts at attacking Sanders by attacking his supporters are pretty darn transparent.

[LondonReign2]

91. "only" 80% planned to vote and "only" 63% were going to vote Democratic?

How horrible! In that case, Democrats would have "only" have had a landslide of epic proportions.

And 40% were independents? And they now endorse Bernie? How horrible!

[struggle4progress]

94. It's not clear what those numbers mean. That report indicates a substantial expected drop in voting

for OWS from 2008 to 2012, which might reflect national trends.

A different survey, actually conducted at OWS while it was still occupying the park, gave these numbers:

56
Percent of demonstrators who say they voted in 2008

74
Percent of those who voted that say they cast a ballot for Obama in 2008

http://theweek.com/articles/480857/demographics-occupy-wall-street-by-numbers

That would mean 60% of the folk in Zucotti Park back in October 2011 didn't vote for Obama in 2008.

It's plausible that "80% planned to vote and 63% were going to vote Democratic" means that overall only 50% planned to vote and to vote Democratic in 2012

[Ken Burch]

128. The 99% thing was just the start.

That was never intended to be the whole program.

Besides, in 2010 (when OWS started)there was no other significant group out there anywhere that was even mentioning income inequality. It was Occupy vs...an empty void.

The issue was totally dead among Democratic politicians-look at how much shit Dennis Kucinich got for bringing it up in 2004 and 2008.

[Jackpine Radical]

5. As Mark Twain commented about himself,

the death of Occupy has been greatly exaggerated.

OWS was not a spontaneous movement that
appeared out of nowhere. It was carefully planned
by a group of experienced political activists, newly
inspired by the Arab Spring and the surge of mass
protest around the world in the first half of 2011.
Although the OWS encampment in New York lasted
only about two months, its impact, and that of the
broader Occupy movement, continues to reverberate
in at least three respects. First, although veteran activists
were instrumental in planning the occupations,
they also attracted numerous other participants who
had little or no previous experience with political
protest. Many of these individuals were deeply radicalized
by their participation in Occupy and will likely
continue on a life path that includes some type of
progressive political activism.
Secondly, as many other commentators have noted,
Occupy transformed U.S. political discourse.
It elevated the issue of growing economic inequality to
the center of public attention, and also highlighted the
creators and beneficiaries of that inequality: “the 1%,”
the wealthy elites whose interests were opposed to
those of the other 99% of the population. To a degree
unprecedented in recent public memory, social class
became a central focus of political debate.
Thirdly, OWS networks survived the evictions and
have resurfaced in a variety of different contexts.
Occupy activists have been visible in recent New York
City labor and community organizing efforts, and
have also been active as “Occupy” in various contexts.
Most notably, Occupy Sandy organized tens of thousands
of relief workers in New York City in the wake of
“Superstorm Sandy,” attracting a new wave of media
attention. As Nathan Schneider (2012c) suggests,
“Occupy After Occupy” has become “a productively
subdivided movement of movements.”

[Marr]

6. What a sad attempt to sow division with race.

Our party's right fringe never fails to disappoint.

[Bonobo]

7. Struggle against progress? nt

[sabrina 1]

20. And it's false, see my post #18. I see we'll have to be prepared for these sly smears.

No problem, I am more than willing to expose them every time they appear.

The truth is that AAs were more supportive of OWS, which one would expect, than the overall population.

Anyhow, it's begun, the smear campaign on the second day.

[Marr]

22. Yuck, that's even worse.

But yep, same old game with a new target. Anyone whose existence makes the bosses look bad, or who just fails to clap hard enough, must be thrown under the bus, with flat out lies if necessary.

How gross. I'd be ashamed to post things like this.

[sabrina 1]

24. It is gross. Why do people work so hard just LOOKING for negative things, then find a FALSE

report and just throw it up there?

Makes me sick frankly. AAs are such a huge part of OWS, still working with people who are going through foreclosures, with the homeless, OWS has been supporting Ferguson Protesters, and now in Baltimore, Chicago.

This is just so false, I don't know where to start.

If I were the OP I would delete it.

[Doctor_J]

8. It should be against the law for affluent white people to advocate for social justice!!!!

!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!

Especially young males!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!

[Cheese Sandwich]

12. Linked study is garbage. The authors' numbers are based on a survey at one event on May 1, 2012

They collected all their survey results at a single event.

It's not representative of the OWS movement.


edit: A survey taken on a different day or a different neighborhood would give wildly different results.

From page 1:

We investigated those questions through
in-depth interviews with 25 core Occupy activists as
well as a representative survey of 729 people who
participated in an OWS-sponsored May 1, 2012 rally
and march. Our research is confined to New York City,
where the movement began and home to its main
target: Wall Street.

[struggle4progress]

19. Since the report is from professional researchers at CUNY, who were sympathetic to OWS

and managed to survey over 700 people, perhaps "garbage" isn't exactly the right word

[JHB]

88. Perhaps you'd prefer "inadequate"?

It's a snapshot sampling of people at one event, in one location, on one day... which happened to be a Tuesday.

In other words, it's interesting and tells some thing... but it has its limitations -- and your argument here exceeds its limitations.

Also, can you provide links to discussions of the report by professionals in that field? What were their comments about the methodology?

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

80. Data is data, but conclusions can be garbage.

If I go through my trash and select a single item out, I could then show it to someone and have them draw the conclusion that 100% of my garbage is made up of that kind of object.

So the study might be fine, unless it tacks on the conclusion that the OP presents and says it's true for the entire movement.

[sabrina 1]

18. "African Americans More Likely to Support Occupy Movement"

Some of the most vocal members of OWS were AAs.



The Corporate Media's job was to diminish the movement and try to divide it. But thankfully, these are all very bright people who dismiss the Corporate Media.

African Americans More Likely To Support Occupy Movement

African Americans are more likely to support the Occupy Movement compared to other Americans, a new NBC News/Wall Street Journal/theGrio.com poll reports.

According to the poll, 45 percent of African Americans support the Occupy Movement as compared to 32 percent of all Americans.

So much more, but what a shame that you would try to diminish all the great work AAs did and are still doing in the Occupy Movement.

It was AA members elected officials who were out there on the streets supporting OWS, even getting arrested.

And AA Musicians and artists and writers who were there almost every day, helping to keep the spirits of the protesters up.



Tom Morello, joined Pete Seeger regularly at OWS protests, along with other great AA artists.

Go tell THEM they failed to participate in OWS.



OWS was created for people of all backgrounds, and AAs made up a huge part of the movement.

Shame how it is AAs who are always dismissed in this country.

Didn't expect to see this old meme from the Right Wing Corporate media here on DU though.

What was your real purpose in reintroducing this false meme from right wing corporate media? I know how upsetting it was to AAs who contributed so much to OWS, but to see this here?



The coalitions of AA Churches joined forces with OWS





Shameful to dismiss this movement's most dedicated members.

I can only assume it has something to do with OWS's endorsement of Bernie Sanders today.

I guess we will have to be prepared for these indirect smears of Bernie.

So I will be working to expose them, as we know they are coming.

[ucrdem]

33. To the degree that I personally encountered OWS awareness in So Cal

it was exclusively young white male, in addition to one older brother and one older sister living in the Bay Area. Online it was a mostly male Reddit-ZeroHedge-Libertarian phenom, much enamored of wikileaks and Anonymous, and either a) completely apolitical or anti-political, or b) tuned into Chomsky and interested in Ron Paul. The Obama administration was distantly viewed as part of the "wall street" landscape indistinguishable from any other administration. Elections were not on the radar and to my knowledge few or none registered to vote. Partly loyalty was nonexistent.

So I share S4P's skepticism if that is what he is expressing.

[sabrina 1]

39. I was in CA, Oakland, LA, SF where AAs, Hispanics, Older people, young people, all ages, all

ethnicities, WOMEN ESPECIALLY were all represented. Don't know where you were, but in NY and Philly where many of my friends, also of all ethnicities and ages and women and gays were all represented.

This OP is a joke. Totally false.

[ucrdem]

42. Fine, your experiences were different. No need to crucify the OP. nt

[LondonReign2]

92. The OP is attempting to smear Occupy in an attempt to smear Bernie

Counter that with facts does not qualify as "crucifying".

[KingCharlemagne]

102. +Infinity! - nt

[Marr]

46. I spent time at two different OWS gatherings in Los Angeles-- Long Beach and dowtown...

...and I had a very different experience. It was racially mixed, and if any group was a majority, it was the poor and the homeless.

You've consistently smeared OWS and the left in general. Your word is worthless on this topic. I don't believe you went to an OWS gathering, unless it was something on a college campus.

And what does that even mean, by the way? "To the extent that I encountered OWS awareness". Is that a sleazy way of implying you went to a gathering when you're actually only talking about people you know who were aware of the group?

[struggle4progress]

49. OP links the study, with page numbers

[Marr]

51. Stop stomping your feet-- I'm not interested in talking to you. /nt

[struggle4progress]

48. Occupy Atlanta offshoot of Wall Street protest denies Rep. John Lewis chance to speak

BY NINA MANDELL
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
Monday, October 10, 2011, 8:50 PM

He may have been a leader in the Civil Rights movement, but Georgia Congressman John Lewis was not welcome to speak at the Occupy Atlanta protest ... In the video, the crowd is seen voting not to let Lewis speak because he is a government figure ... He is seen respectfully leaving the protest after they denied him a chance to speak. "I was going to say, I stand with you," Lewis told CBS Atlanta after the incident ...

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/occupy-atlanta-offshoot-wall-street-protest-denies-rep-john-lewis-chance-speak-gathering-article-1.960844

The problem seems to have been widespread

[sabrina 1]

58. Another falsehood that has been dealt with by Rep Lewis himself. Keep dragging up these old Fox

Right wing attacks on AAs and OWS. I'm actually enjoying this now. Is your candidate so worried that you are willing to stoop this low to try to smear another candidate?

John Lewis supported OWS, stopped by to lend his support, speakers were waiting in line to the General Assembly. He was more than willing to do the same, did not want to be pushed to the head of the line. Someone tried to do that, but was told how the General Assemmblies work. Faux et al immediately tried to do what you are trying to do, but Rep Lewis made a statement in support of the General Assembly. He had some advice for the protesters and said he would try to get there again.

What a disgrace that we have to go over all this again, and why? Why are you working so hard to try to smear Bernie Sanders?

I promise you this, every right wing talking point re OWS you raise, I will correct in an OP. Because all of this is well documented so it won't take a lot of time.

Do you think this is going to help your candidate?

OWS loved Rep Lewis, he was greeted with respect and love and returned the sentiment.

Shame you are now misrepresenting a Civil Rights leader and ignoring his own response to these right wing attacks on OWS.

[Marr]

59. +1, this is one of the lowest things I've seen on this site.

On the other hand, if the recs are any indication, exceedingly few are willing to hop into this particular mud pit.

[brentspeak]

50. Shouldn't your handle be "ucrRepub"?

[ucrdem]

55. As I was saying . . .

[KingCharlemagne]

101. See post #18. Are you denying the evidence in the photos? - nt

[Chathamization]

56. Another interesting article: "Occupy DC expands to black churches"

At the Washington Post. CNN also had an article about it:

A group of African-American church leaders announced Wednesday their intention to join ranks with the Occupy movement in the nation's capital, bolstering what some consider a mutual message of condemning income inequality and social injustice.

Not sure what came of it (the articles are from 3+ years ago); it seems that the Occupy DC group has mostly splintered (I guess activists remain activists no matter what organizational label they choose to wear at any given moment). I should note that this guy:

"We are occupying until poverty is eradicated," pastor Jamal Harrison Bryant told reporters at the National Press Club in Washington, near where a core group of activists remains encamped.

Was the person who delivered the eulogy at Freddy Grays funeral. Though a number of people seem very interested in splitting and dividing the movement for justice and equality apart, when you actually look at the people who are on the ground fighting for a better world, you find a lot of unity.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

83. They certainly risked far more in so doing.

Especially black women, who could be sure to be singled out for more sexual and non-sexual violent abuse at the hands of police. Being a white male at an OWS protest might not make you immune to police abuse; only being extremely rich or powerful does that these days. But it certainly provided at least some degree of hope that you might be treated more humanely.

[KingCharlemagne]

111. That is a damned good point. The camp at OLA also had a problem with sexual harassment, abuse

and even assault of some of the female campers there, so I would say any woman irrespective of color was at far greater risk of disproportionate violence. To its credit, OLA tried to address the issue (of camp sexual violence), discuss it and find solutions. But I cannot say they ever succeeded any more than the general cultural misogyny. But at least OLA discussed it and made everyone aware of it.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

112. Yup. I'm not trying to minimize the place of either women of minorities or minority women in OWS.

I'm pointing out that they took additional risks beyond those of the 'young white males', that, if anything, they were more courageous in risking themselves.

[KingCharlemagne]

114. Well put. I saw some of the most courageous acts I have ever seen in my life

at the OLA camp in Oct-Nov 2011. And I heard some of the msot eloquent speeches there also (the most eloquent given by a young, black male named simply 'Blue'). I will never forgive Villain-raigosa, Charlie Himmler Beck and the LAPD\Sheriff's Dept for the events of November 30, 2011. And I will never forget.

[KingCharlemagne]

100. This should be made into its own OP, imho. Whom are you going to believe, S4P's skeezy data

and dubious study or your own lying eyes?

Aside from the U.S. military, OWS is and was probably the most egalitarian institutions I've ever seen. This OP is just pure BS and rubbish.

[hifiguy]

148. Thanks for this, sabrina!!

[sadoldgirl]

23. Pardon me, but this is pure and idiotic BS

I was down here in my city with the OWS people
for quite a number of times.
A) A lot of older people,
B) Students without much money,
C) Many young health workers.

So, when you make that claim, my question to you:
How often were you at those OWS places? Did you
bother to talk to the people? And, if you joined them
( which I doubt very much) you could have seen
as I did quite a lot of women, young or old.

But for heaven's sake keep up that idiotic story
if it serves your purpose to put down a new
minor uprising against TPTB.

[sabrina 1]

27. It's a not so subtle smear against Bernie Sanders who got an endorsement from OWS

first time they have endoresed a candidate. And it really stinks, playing the race card again?? Didn't we have enough of that in the 2008 elections?

[sadoldgirl]

41. You may be right, Sabrina, but I encountered

a few black youngsters, who did not want to join,
because they felt their issues were not brought up.

I wished I could have talked to them myself, but this
was an argument between the youngsters, and I could
understand both sides. Perhaps I should say that the
white youngsters were somewhat at a loss to answer
those black kids. Unfortunately there is still no clear
communication even among the young.

Just my experience.

[Marr]

31. I spent time at two here in Los Angeles, and had a similar experience.

It was a very mixed group in both locations.

[struggle4progress]

43. OP links the study, with page numbers

[sadoldgirl]

53. I don't care, I want to know whether YOU ever

visited them, talked to them and/or saw the
stormtroopers come down on them.

What a fool I am to even try to engage with you
on that topic, because I know,what you are after.

Thus all I can say: Shame on you!

[Luminous Animal]

25. And thus they don't matter.

[sabrina 1]

30. A totally false OP, intended to subtly smear Bernie Sanders. See my post #18 for the facts.

This OP should be deleted if the OP had any shame. Dismissing the work of AAs in OWS where they were and are a huge presence, all working with protesters in Ferguson over the past year, out on the streets since 2012 as part of OWS. It's one of the most blatant falsehoods I've seen on DU.

[JI7]

26. probably because of the anarchists

[hunter]

29. Well thank God I was never an affluent young white male.

I wouldn't want to be burdened by that shame.



My parents would write checks to my student housing slumlords and the Regents of the University of California that would bounce,

My survival response, aside from crawling back home to be the chicken feeding boy, was to be useful to my slumlords, and interesting to my professors.

Ordinary airline tickets to the east coast were impossible in my universe.

But I did thumb rides sometimes, even on aircraft to foreign lands.

[NYC_SKP]

35. "Was"? I don't know about the racial makeup, but they're not gone.

My best friend was an organizer for his community Occupy organization back then.

This year he's going to the Dem convention in Anaheim as a delegate!

[ucrdem]

38. K'n'R, accords with my own observations, detailed above in reply #33.

Others may have had different experiences. As far as Senator Sanders and his newfound accolades, I can't at the moment think of a tactful way to express my own skepticism, so I won't .

[sabrina 1]

44. And you are incorrect, unless you were in a very privileged and small area of the state. AAs

and other minorities dominated most of the CA cities OWS groups. But if you want to diminish their efforts, that is your privilege I suppose.

[ucrdem]

45. I'm telling you what I observed. nt

[brentspeak]

52. More likely what you were instructed to say you observed. n/t

[ucrdem]

54. People in glass houses should close their drapes. nt

[ms liberty]

87. Sanders "new found accolades"...LOL

I have been following Bernie for many years now - more than 10; he was still in the House when I discovered him. If you'd been reading what DU'ers who support him have posted about him, you would know that is the norm...we're excited about Bernie because we know who he is, and we know Bernie is The Real Deal.

[KingCharlemagne]

107. It would behoove you to study and learn the difference between

"accolades" and "acolytes," since I'm sure you mean the latter and not the former. OTOH, your post is an ouroboros, full of sound and fury but signifying nothing, so vocabulary building should probably be lowest on your list of priorities, behind things like, say, posting comments that actually have substance.

[struggle4progress]

57. The demographics of Occupy Wall Street

October 20, 2011

... More than $75,000
Annual salary that 13 percent of the survey-takers take home, according to Cordero-Guzman and Schultz ...

32
Percent who consider themselves Democrats; nearly the same amount (33 percent) say they don't affiliate themselves with any political party ...

56
Percent of demonstrators who say they voted in 2008

74
Percent of those who voted that say they cast a ballot for Obama in 2008

http://theweek.com/articles/480857/demographics-occupy-wall-street-by-numbers

So 60% of the folk in Zucotti Park back in October 2011 didn't vote for Obama in 2008

[romanic]

60. OWS

failed mostly because it was an unorganized protest that devolved into different groups wanting different things which led to infighting and the 1% laughing their asses off in the ivory towers of Wall Street.

I don't think the so-called "affluent white men" were at fault for OWS flopping.

[smokey nj]

72. Tell that to all the people in NY and NJ who they helped

after Hurricane Sandy.

[merrily]

61. NOT TRUE OF BOSTON OWS and the Mayor stuc OWS on a median very close to the business district

Not reflective of a single photo of OWS anywhere in the country that I have ever seen. Makes no sense, either. But, let's say it's true: So what?

[struggle4progress]

62. Movement demographics may provide insight into what to expect from movement support

Currently, white males are much less likely to vote democratic than women or persons of color; and as a general rule, people who insist on calling themselves independents are much more likely to vote R than D. There are different reports on how OWS folk voted in 2008, but the article linked here (based on polling at OWS in Fall 2011) indicates only about 40% of OWS voted for Obama in 2008

[romanic]

63. May I ask a question?

If white males weren't in the OWS movement at all, would you cry about them not being supportive of the 99%? I mean you're backing yourself and others into a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation here with your opinions. I mean, you're not going to win anybody's support on this.

[struggle4progress]

70. I was once an affluent young white male, and the main difference now

is that I am no longer young

I don't think social class is determinative but I do think it is usually very informative: if you know something about a person's social class then you also know something about the subculture in which they are immersed and something about where their interests lie; you know something about the ideas they hear regularly and something about the critical effort it will take them to escape from their cultural straitjacket in an effort to obtain a broader and more effective consciousness

So a class analysis of Occupy might be worthwhile. Forty-some years ago, I would probably have thought that camping in a public park and proclaiming myself one of the 99% was a bold revolutionary move

I have since ceased to believe in the utility of proclamation unaccompanied by concrete attainable objectives and intelligent organizing. I don't care whether or not someone claims to support the 99% since the bare claim is fairly vacuous. But anyone, who wants people to believe that camping on behalf of the 99% could actually accomplish anything, is effectively supporting the status quo by encouraging people to waste time

[ucrdem]

71. ^^ Awesome ^^

But anyone who wants people to believe that camping on behalf of the 99% could actually accomplish anything is effectively supporting the status quo by encouraging people to waste time.

Beautifully expressed.

[magical thyme]

81. OWS has long since moved forward from "camping in a public park"

Not to mention that their "camping" trips did something very important -- they changed the national discussion to the gross and increasing concentration of national and global wealth into the hands of the very few.
Since their "camping" beginnings, they have moved on to practical action. For example, I believe they are behind the student loan 'rolling jubilee' that has freed a large number of young people from nearly $32M in student loans.

http://rollingjubilee.org/

And I seem to remember them being involved in helping people being foreclosed on...

[Ken Burch]

67. It's not as though any significant number of OWS types voted for McCain-Palin.

I really hope you are not going to make an argument that OWS was some sort of GOP plot-there is no evidence that Obama would have done better in 2012 if OWS had somehow never happened.

[struggle4progress]

74. No, I don't think OWS was a GOP plot. I do think there's some evidence that OWS had some tendency

of apathy towards electoral involvement. I also think certain supposedly "leftist" themes popular in 2012 contributed to leftist electoral apathy, which cost us dearly that year, and I suspect the GOP probably helped push some of those themes as the election drew closer

[Ken Burch]

77. My impression was that the energy created by OWS helped us in '12.

That, by speaking to concerns the administration had more-or-less dismissed in its first term on economic equality and corporate control of politics(largely, I'm convinced, due to the reactionary influence of Rahm Emanuel on the admministrations' priorities) OWS brought more young people into political discussion and engagement and thus added to our volunteer base and our vote total.

Frankly, before OWS started in late 2010, I didn't see any reason to believe the Obama-Biden ticket would come close to being re-elected.

[TM99]

76. But here is what is so ridiculous

about this argument.

Almost 73% of all Americans are white. If the Democratic party focused itself exclusively on getting only persons of colors that is only 27% of the total US population.

That's silly. It is imperative for the Democratic party to draw in and not lose white voters, especially white male voters.

If that occurs through engaging them in populist rights movements like OWS, then all the better.

[struggle4progress]

85. The dull reality is that one must become a bean counter rather than a binary thinker

Here are two useful links:

http://www.people-press.org/2012/08/23/a-closer-look-at-the-parties-in-2012/
http://www.people-press.org/files/legacy-detailed_tables/Detailed%20tables%20for%20Party%20ID.pdf

[TM99]

105. If we accept that the GOP

is the only place welcomed to white male voters then the Democratic party will not win many elections in the coming decade. The numbers don't support it.

I see Sanders as someone who could halt that. We shall see.

[struggle4progress]

106. Again: you need to think in statistical rather than binary terms

[TM99]

108. I am well aware of statistics

and yours still don't match up with reality and what can be if the correct Democratic challenger is brought forth.

But I won't argue further as this entire thread is rather passive aggressive.

[djean111]

64. I will venture a really wild guess that, if OWS had endorsed HRC, this OP would not exist.

[morningfog]

65. For sure. Give the struggler time.

Soon enough, he'll come right out and struggle against Sanders' positions.

[struggle4progress]

73. No, that won't happen: I almost always like Sanders' positions.

But I think electability is important -- and I don't think he's electable

Moreover, since Occupy was a fairly formless movement, with very little connection to the real world of electoral politics and perhaps a large proportion of non-voters, I don't think an online post, from a handful of people, suggesting that Occupy supports Sanders, really means much

[morningfog]

75. But apparently it means enough for you to start

an OP and post repeatedly on the subject?

If Sanders is not "electable," he won't be elected, with or without your help to make it so.

[struggle4progress]

90. The nature of the discussion in this thread suggests a fair number of people

will support Sanders while he's winning, then will step back to sulk when he finally loses the primaries, as seems inevitable

Since we need a good turn-out to win in 2016, a large number of people whining "I have no reason to vote since Sanders lost" could hurt us badly

[morningfog]

97. A lot of assumptions on your part, but even so,

what's the point or objective in your posts? To depress the Sanders vote before or during the primary??? To help ensure an early lose or exit for him?

[morningfog]

99. Oh, I get it. Start the frame early to blame liberals for Hillary's lose.

[struggle4progress]

104. There will be no point in blaming people after the fact; there is, however, some point

in scouting out the territory as well as possible in advance and trying to point out to folk the swamps they may not want to march into

[Ken Burch]

134. And if Bernie didn't run, no other candidate would engage the people rallying around him.

None of them would turn into passionate HRC supporters if only she had no progressive challenger.

And HRC could keep those people in the game by incorporating significant parts of Bernie's ideas in her own platform-if she's nominated, she doesn't have to make a big show of totally annihilating them in the convention hall.

It just takes some open-mindedness and creativity on her part.

Remember, we didn't lose in '68 because Johnson was dumped (the disastrous near-defeat of the Tet Offensive would have made him unelectable); we lost because the Peace Democrats were undemocratically crushed on the convention floor and the protesters were unjustifiably beaten and teargassed outside(sometimes just while they were listening to free rock concerts in Grant and Lincoln Park).

It was the arrogance of Daley and Johnson, not the vigorous primary debate, that doomed us to Nixon.

[Ken Burch]

132. If you don't think Bernie is electable, make a positive case for someone else.

There's no reason for you to be trying to discredit Bernie and OWS. Nothing would be better for the cause of social and economicc justive if Occupy hadn't happened. We would clearly have done worse in 2012 without it.

[KingCharlemagne]

110. LOL. Dateline: Department of the Obvious :) - nt

[Ken Burch]

66. I seriously doubt that OWS was racist, if that's what you're implying.

Couldn't it just have been that that particular demographic were most of the folks who happened to show up?

In my observation, there always seemed to be a lot of poc at the Occupy camps...maybe there just weren't more because poc had greater outside responsibilities and less available time to participate in something like a long-term encampment-and also because they knew they'd be treated worse by the cops(as poc arrestees were, sometimes on camera)when the arrests came(possibly OWS organizers advised poc to leave earlier because they saw it coming).

I'm going to ask you some other things in a pm shortly, because I'd rather discuss them with you there than in this thread.

[Doctor_J]

93. I think the op is meant to imply that Sanders and his supporters are racists. it is a very

disgusting post, and probably predictive of the shit we'll see from the PUMAS.

[struggle4progress]

109. I never suggested Sanders is a racist and don't consider him such

[KingCharlemagne]

113. You insinuated that OWS was racist, thereby hoping to tarnish

its endorsement of Sanders. If OWS had endorsed HRC, your OP would have never seen the light of day.

Your OP is shameful.

[struggle4progress]

118. First, it's difficult to understand how a largely amorphous movement with little organization

could actually endorse anyone. Second, the Occupy movement seems to have consisted of a large number of folk uninterested in electoral politics, so the practical significance of such an endorsement would be questionable in any case. Third, a comment such as "If OWS had endorsed HRC, your OP would have never seen the light of day" suggests you believe you have ESP, which is not actually the case

[KingCharlemagne]

123. So you admit you insinuated that OWS was racist. I doubt you would have had an issue

with OWS' racism had it endorsed HRC.

Like I say, shameful, duplicitous and insulting to the many brave members of OWS and to the followers of Sanders.

[struggle4progress]

126. I often wonder how many people confuse their hallucinations with realities

[Ken Burch]

135. If the endorsement is insignificant, why are you so determined to discredit it?

If you really thought it was insignificant, wouldn't you just not say anything about it at all?

The fact that you are belaboring this seems to indicate that you find it threatening, for some reason.

And yes, OWS had a lot of people who once disdained electoral politics, shouldn't you welcome the idea that those people are now open to electoral projects? Shouldn't we WANT new blood in this party?

Nothing will go better for us in the fall of '16 if the primaries are dull, bland and free of debate, as they would be without Bernie.

[struggle4progress]

150. It looks to me like low swampy ground, and I think searching there for will-o-the-wisps

would be a damp pointless detour

[Katashi_itto]

68. Lol, very clumsy attempt to smear Bernie and Economic Justice movements.

[smokey nj]

69. Can't smear Bernie on civil rights, so smear his supporters.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

79. Makes sense.

Women are more likely to get sexually harassed by police, minorities are more likely to get assaulted in non-sexual ways. Most people who have and need jobs are not going to be willing to lose those jobs by spending day after day at protests.

Older folks can't as easily stand the physical stress of prolonged protests.

So the people who can most safely protest in our sexist, racist society are white men, and the ones who can spend days on end doing so without seriously hurting their own lives are going to be the unemployed, homeless, or those who can count on generational wealth to see them through.

So was this simply a random fact thrown out into the ether or was there some point to this OP?

(ETA: Nvm, having read the comments, I see why this post was put up, and how it's misleadingly based on a single event, not the entire movement. Still, my points stand - it's a lot safer and easier for young white males to demonstrate than for minorities or women. Minorities and women risk more in so doing, and those of us of more mature years aren't as physically resilient as we used to be.)

[KingCharlemagne]

116. Your attempts to analyze and engage the smear job in the OP are laudable. Your

efforts really deserve a far wider venue, imo, although I'm not sure what the occasion for it might be.

One school of thought about revolutions says they occur when a sizable proportion of a population (not necessariy a majority) concludes it has more to lose with the status quo than with changing it. I'm not sure I completely accept that theory, but we could say that OWS "failed" because most people had not yet reached that mentality of thinking they had more to lose sticking with post-industrial capitalism than changing to a different untried system.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

117. I think that's a reasonable school of thought.

It might not be the ONLY time revolutions occur, but it's certainly either a contributor, or a cause of many.

I've said the same thing about "terrorists". If we truly wanted to fight a 'war on terrorism', we wouldn't be fighting with violence. We'd be fighting to bring third world countries up out of hopelessness and despair, raising their standards of living up, building them infrastructure, teaching their people, giving them healthcare. Give them something to want to keep, not have them feel that they've got nothing to lose by turning to violence.

[KingCharlemagne]

119. Since 'terror' as the word is commonly used is a miitary tactic used by the weak

against militarily stronger forces going back at least to 1945 and the Zionist resistance to British rule in Palestine (but probably going back to slave rebellions like Nat Turner's in the U.S. or even Spanish resistance to Napoleon Bonaparte whence comes the term 'guerilla'), fighting a 'war on terror' is akin to fighting a 'war on tanks'. You will never defeat a tactic. You might convince combatants not to use the tactic with the proper mix of positive reinforcement and respect. But 'war on terror' makes for such great branding for the marketing Yo-Yos on Madison Ave. so there you have it.

[treestar]

82. And highly educated

Almost all had college degrees. Their economic hardship consisted of student loans. IOW, being middle class to start with.

Interesting how planned the whole thing was, too.

[Oktober]

86. .... and they still failed miserably...

So what?

[Ken Burch]

129. Most of the time, the Left fails...

Does that mean we shouldn't even try?

Nothing would ever have changed on anything anywhere if people only worked for change when they knew victory was already certain.

[99Forever]

103. And your point is?

[gollygee]

120. I'm thinking affluent people were more likely to be able to put the time in

and due to the history of racism in our country, affluent people will be disproportionately white. The younger you are, the more likely you don't have family responsibilities that demand your time.

This just doesn't seem shocking to me. I'm not that young anymore, and I'm a woman, but I'm affluent and white. I can hardly make negative assumptions about other people based only on them being white and affluent, particularly when they're singled out because of doing progressive work.

[Bluenorthwest]

122. The OP is in fact a straight, white man.

nt

[Ken Burch]

125. Seriously?

I always assumed "Struggle" was an African American woman.

[struggle4progress]

137. Nope. I'm old white dude. But I do regularly chat with a number of African American women,

and I've learned a lot about this country that way

[Ken Burch]

161. "But I do regularly chat with a number of African American women"

You do realize what that statement sounds like, don't you...?

Someone else in the class will point it out to you, I'm sure.

[struggle4progress]

162. Frankly, I don't much care what it sounds like: I'm just grateful for what I learn

[tiredtoo]

121. As a charter member of Occupy the tri

Occupy the tri was a merger of occupy Saginaw, occupy Bay City and occupy Midland here in mid-Michigan. I can assure you we had no affluent young white males in our group.

[LiberalAndProud]

124. So we're discrediting the OWS movement now.

Shameful.

It's shameful because the people I met at OWS events were both white and nonwhite, male and female. Your attempt to discredit this as a white male movement discredits all of us who aren't. And it underhandedly smears progressive white males.

Shameful.

[lumberjack_jeff]

130. ... whom we don't hate at all! Really! n/t

[LiberalAndProud]

142. For once, I agree with you jeff.

This OP is in very poor taste.

[marle35]

133. As a posting newbie...

I think it's unfortunate that someone with over 80,000 posts decided it was appropriate to post an OP with an inflammatory title, and not state their purpose in bringing up the topic or their opinion. Yes, he has replied in the thread later on to specific posts, but really. Does it hurt to add some explanation in the OP?

[struggle4progress]

139. I think it's rude to link long reports without giving details

[nashville_brook]

146. very good point!

i grew up very poor and then went to live affluent relatives in high school. some of the best allies i've worked with in political and cultural production have been people from the background you describe. and, if i were to be totally honest, even though i don't have access to the money associated with affluence, i've benefited from the cultural privilege, experience and network.

FDR was affluent and he was the best working class hero I can think of.

class-based smears stink, suck and blow no matter which way they cut.

[MisterP]

141. this is the same reason why nobody takes Tumblrinas seriously

while other people are reaching out and learning from each other, these little shits are ripping the "A" off "LGBTA" signs, saying transwomen are infiltrating the female sphere (and, what, reporting back to some Men's Council?), or getting mad that there's a men's suicide-counseling center opening up on campus

we have an anti-Wall Street movement and the people who've been crying about "purism" (y'know, having any sort of standards) for 15 years while applauding every skull-crackingly reactionary policy that's come along have reduced themselves to race-baiting

Once I saw this guy on a bridge about to jump. I said, "Don't do it!" He said, "Nobody loves me." I said, "God loves you. Do you believe in God?"

He said, "Yes." I said, "Are you a Christian or a Jew?" He said, "A Christian." I said, "Me, too! Protestant or Catholic?" He said, "Protestant." I said, "Me, too! What franchise?" He said, "Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Baptist or Southern Baptist?" He said, "Northern Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist or Northern Liberal Baptist?"

He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region, or Northern Conservative Baptist Eastern Region?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region." I said, "Me, too!"

Northern Conservative†Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1879, or Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912." I said, "Die, heretic!" And I pushed him over.

plus, y'know, it's WRONG

[tblue37]

143. So? The only way that the marginalized and oppressed will ever have any chance is if those

who enjoy some degree of power or privilege, or those who are at least somewhat less marginalized and oppressed, join in solidarity with those more oppressed and abused than they are themselves.The LAST thing we want is for those with some small degree of privilege to sit back and say that inequality, injustice, and the oppression and disenfranchisement of marginalized groups are not their problem as long as they've "got theirs"!

[nashville_brook]

144. wow that's some BS

I was with our Occupy group from the beginning and that would be a mischaracterization of our group...and every group I visited in Florida.

But secondly, and you know this...this is meant to malign the movement, and for that you should be ashamed. People put their lives on hold and got arrested, and some are STILL paying for taking action on wealth inequality wrought by Wall Street.

The people who spent their days and nights "on the ground" with Occupy, by and large, were economically marginalized. You literally COULD NOT spend that time and do that work while doing the things needed to be "affluent." As a matter of fact it was a constant point of tension of how to include people who WERE more affluent and wanted to participate but couldn't be "on the ground" 24-7.

[lumberjack_jeff]

151. It's meant to malign the movement... by associating it with (insert racial/gender group here).

The problematic part is after the ellipsis.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

145. Are we just importing Discussionist threads these days?

The OP isn't distinguishable from the anger-filled invective hurled by the right. What a loser.

[hifiguy]

147. Do the demographics of a group standing up for social justice matter?

I think not.

[romanic]

149. Demonizing privileges

Leads to infighting among the social justice circle. Congrats OP.

[ucrdem]

154. Is it possible that someone favors a different candidate or holds a different view of OWS

than our own without being the world's most eeeeevuhl troll? Is it possible that we can lighten up a notch and the DU world will still turn?

[Marr]

159. When you said, "to the extent that I encountered OWS awareness in So Cal", what did that mean?

Does that mean that, 'the people ucrdem encountered in So Cal who knew about OWS were exclusively white males'?

[ucrdem]

160. I think I've supplied enough personal information already for you to take my meaning

and don't feel inclined to go beyond that at this juncture. However, I'll be happy to elaborate on the conclusion I drew from that experience, which is that the Occupy movement was a domestic civil society operation engineered to "occupy" the time of political activists and divert their attention from legitimate organizing into what was essentially a blind alley. That's not to say that many good people didn't have good experiences or occasionally use the opportunity to organize charitable interventions like Hurricane Sandy and the loan forgiveness program. But it had its greatest effect in Nov. 2012 and we've been living with the repercussions ever since.

That is my opinion based solely on my own experience; others may have had different experiences and reached different conclusions and that's fine.

[Marr]

163. In other words, I was correct.

The bias here is your social circle, not OWS.

"to the extent that I encountered OWS awareness in So Cal"

So ucrdem hangs out with a bunch of comfortable white guys. A few of them have heard of OWS. Therefore, OWS is all comfortable white guys.

This is why no one takes you seriously.

[ucrdem]

164. Great. Enjoy the rest of the thread. nt

[Marr]

165. Oh, I will. Just wanted to point out that you didn't ever actually *go* to an OWS gathering,

contrary to your chickenshit, dishonest implications to that effect. And the only 'affluent white male' bias in your personal survey was the people you personally choose to mix with in So Cal.

[ucrdem]

166. Don't forget to wash your hands when you're done. nt

[Marr]

167. My hands are still clean, but I'll wipe my feet. :)

Thanks.

[ucrdem]

168. Oh my. I'll get a mop. nt

[Marr]

169. Question--

Do you get a bonus if you get the last post in an exchange like this?

[Eleanors38]

155. Disaster! Round up the usual suspects, immediately.

[SomethingFishy]

158. Wow.

I suggest you see a film called "The Hacker Wars". Might clue you in on a few things.