"Occupy" and the Ron Paul campaign

[MH1]

Ok I'm just putting this out there as a question.

OccupyPhilly has a Ron Paul campaign tent at probably the most visible, 'best' corner of the plaza they're using (Dilworth Plaza in front of City Hall and across from the main Center City transit hub).

To me, what the Occupy Wall Street movement was originally about, was rage against the Wall Streeters for ruining the economy and basically getting off scot-free ... and not even accepting reasonable regulations.

The core tenet of Ron Paul, as displayed on this 'keystone' tent at Occupy Philly, is that we can't expect the government to regulate corporations. (It uses some cute rhetoric to say that but that is what it says. Wish I'd taken a picture. But it shouldn't be shocking to anyone who knows Paul's platform).

Frankly, that Ron Paul tent and message is a huge turn-off to me and antithetical to what I thought the 'Occupy' movement was about. Yet it remains there, day after day after day.

Your thoughts? What if instead of Ron Paul, it was promoting the Tea Party? Would it still be there? Should it?

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MH1]

2. My 'concern'???

I'm asking a question.

Occupy Philly, from the perspective that I see it EVERY FUCKING WORKDAY looks, to a passerby, like A FUCKING RON PAUL CAMPAIGN AD.

And you think that's just a 'concern'????

[coalition_unwilling]

10. What are you doing yourself to help Occupy Philly? Have you

attended a General Assembly to voice your objections? (I think it is incumbent on all who can to attend Occupy encampments).

I'm not criticizng you, but think you owe it to yourself to lend your voice (which is the equal of any Paulbot there).

[MH1]

29. Not yet, but I intend to.

I don't live in Philly. I work full time, commute a couple hours a day, am involved in many community activities, and have family issues. So I've been unable to get directly involved before now. But I walk by there every day on the way to catch my train. So yesterday (as I have today off), I decided to cruise through and see what was what. I got a sense of how I could voice my concerns but wanted to give it some thought first. When I return next week from a brief trip I am going to try to get involved. Part of my reason for starting this discussion here was to get a general sense of people's feelings and expectations about this 'movement' and maybe get a dry run of how my concerns will be received (although DU certainly is not the same group of people as OWS Philly).

That said, I considered donating but the continued prominence of the Ron Paul tent has dissuaded me so far. I donate to many causes and I pick and choose. The Ron Paul campaign issue MUST be resolved before I could donate any money. (I might consider donating to another OWS if I think it's better handled. But I would probably rather donate to a Philly homeless shelter in that case.)

[coalition_unwilling]

61. My wife is something of an armchair anthropologist (familiar with

tribal dynamics and such-like) and she suggests that you surface the idea of 'shunning' the Paulites at the General Assembly. Meaning: Paulites not welcome to use PortaPotties, first aid, nutrition, etc.

My guess is the Paulites (if they're like the ones in Occupy Los Angeles) are day trippers who are not camping overnight and likely not to be attending General Assembly. Your voice is vitally important and your issue deserves to be raised until you are satisfied with the outcome. Don't rest or waver.

[MH1]

3. Can you elaborate on why you (apparently) think this is unimportant?

I've been head down nose to the grindstone for a while and haven't been able to pay as much attention to this 'movement' as I would have liked to. But I find the Ron Paul affiliation really puzzling, and ominous. (That said, I'm on record saying "Please, Ron Paul, run as a third party candidate!" Altho if very many 'progressives' are so naive as to fall for his bullshit, that might not be a good thing after all.)

[Luminous Animal]

8. Why do you think "progressives" want them there?

[MH1]

15. I have no idea. That is what puzzles me. But I've seen Paul supporters here at DU.

And I guess I thought OWS was a progressive movement. If it isn't then I don't know what it is. But in Philly, it looks like a Ron Paul campaign ad, and I can't support that.

[Poll_Blind]

16. Anyone can set up a tent at a public protest. Period. DUers get that, OWS folks get that.

I even posted a poll just to find out if there was any confusion on the point in a case where CBS had chosen to focus on one clearly anti-Semitic person walking through the protest shouting anti-Semitic slogans. The result: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=2107645&mesg_id=2107645">109 out of 110 people could tell the difference.

Maybe you ought to consider re-reading the last part of your message:

Frankly, that Ron Paul tent and message is a huge turn-off to me and antithetical to what I thought the 'Occupy' movement was about. Yet it remains there, day after day after day.

Your thoughts? What if instead of Ron Paul, it was promoting the Tea Party? Would it still be there? Should it?

The implication seems to be that the OWS movement has some...obligation to enforce your opinion of what OWS stands for.

They don't. They already know what they stand for and it has nothing to do with Ron Paul's campaign or Barack Obama's campaign or any other political campaign. Further, it has nothing to do with the Democratic or Republican parties, MoveOn, the John Birch society, Freemasonry, Israel, Palestine, gay marriage, abortion, etc.

Just about everyone automatically gets this.

PB

[MH1]

19. It LOOKS like it has to do with the Ron Paul campaign

Have you walked past that corner in Philly? If not, then you don't know what you are talking about here.

OWS has no obligation to be about what I thought it was about. But I have no obligation to support any 'movement' that is harmful, and if it is promoting a candidate like Ron Paul, it is absolutely harmful. I would expect most DUers to 'get' that supporting Ron Paul is harmful, whether it is OWS or anyone else.

Thanks for the insults. Noted.

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[socialist_n_TN]

4. Yep, I've worried about the Paulbots co-opting this thing too

I saw some signs of it at the Nashville site also. The longer this goes on without a clear direction for the anger, the more danger that the Paulbots with their libertarian bullshit will wind up in control of OWS. THAT would be a sign of the Wall Street co-option that I've feared. After all, the Paulbots want NO government control over Wall Street at all. That's the same thing that Wall Street wants.

[MH1]

5. Exactly my point.

And I don't think OWS supporters should be blowing this off as a minor 'concern'. Sure they want to be inclusive but they need to draw some boundaries. Or something to avoid being co-opted by clever trojan horses for Wall Street.

[Mojorabbit]

18. It is a concern of mine also. nt

[PETRUS]

6. OWS is fundamentally democratic

Anybody is welcome to come and bring any idea. Libertarianism doesn't hold up to scrutiny. Don't worry too much about it, but do educate people.

[MH1]

12. I'm going to suggest that the tents be rotated every couple days or so

It doesn't seem right that one 'message' gets center stage continually. Obviously a political campaign has paid operatives that know how to seize opportunities like this, and they did.

So I guess that you are saying that Tea Partiers could hold that spot and they'd be welcome too?

As far as 'scrutiny', the problem is that a lot of people either don't make the effort to scrutinize, or don't understand what they are seeing. Otherwise the philosophy of Ayn Rand, 'everyone out for themselves and band together to beat up individuals if it works for you', would have died out long ago.

[PETRUS]

25. All people are welcome.

Institutional representation seems inappropriate and I would suggest discussing potential abuses at a general assembly.

[socialist_n_TN]

33. Is it? I thought they were trying for "consensus".

That's a sizable difference from democratic. Correct me if I'm wrong, but consensus would take the Paulbots into consideration and they would have a veto over the majority. That's the way I read "consensus".

[PETRUS]

39. Look up democracy, or democratic

All it means is a system where the power is vested in the people. Majority rule is just one possible implementation.

PS. on edit: I realize I didn't address your concern, i.e. the potential for small & dedicated minority to block action. I'll have to check into that more, as I have yet to participate in a general assembly. But I believe if there is 90% approval for something, those attempting to "block" are out of luck.

[socialist_n_TN]

43. Thanks for the reply. I confess

I don't know a lot about the nuts and bolts of what they're doing in the GAs. But the "consensus" model is similiar to what happened to the House and Senate after the '08 election. A dedicated minority DID block action.

I overall prefer the soviet (small "s") model. It was majority based rather than consensus based.

[PETRUS]

52. Yup.

Small-s soviets (councils) are a pretty good idea. Unfortunately we Americans have 50 years of cold war propaganda rooted in our brains, so it's pretty hard to have an honest conversation about it. And the sad truth is that the governing institutions of the Soviet Union (for example) did become opaque and unresponsive to the people.

[socialist_n_TN]

53. Thanks to the Stalinist bureaucracy, they sure did

Become unresponsive that is. But I'm a fan of the soviets of '05 and '17. They were probably the most TRULY representative councils ever known. You didn't go against the people who elected you or you were subject to INSTANT recall.

For the American audience though, councils and assemblies are probably a MUCH better term. :)

[Freddie Stubbs]

7. Just be glad it's not the Larouchies

[FormerDittoHead]

9. I hate (ooh! such a strong word!) Ron Paul. So this is what I'd do.

There is a group in the Paul "tent" (joke!) that wants to deceive liberals.

The presence of his tent there, and the implication he's with OWS is an implied LIE. I would not be polite.

They talk about ending the wars and legalizing pot, but these are LIES to the extent that they really don't represent the heart of what he wants to do, which is too radical for most Republicans!

So, as much as I hate his lies and the lies of those who follow him, I'd get these bumper sticker sized labels (about 5 cents each) you can run off in a computer printer. On them, I'd make up some slogans, TELL THE TRUTH and stick them where I could, if you get my drift.

http://www.onlinelabels.com/OL178.htm

[MH1]

13. Excellent idea! I'll look into it.

[FormerDittoHead]

59. I really hate these guys. Maybe you should think about sticking some of THESE around their tent!

(create your own using those labels in my prior msg)

http://www.zazzle.com/i_miss_w_bumper_sticker-128516228427279858

http://www.zazzle.com/dump_the_dems_bumper_sticker-128917454020406703

http://www.zazzle.com/show_me_the_birth_certificate_bumper_sticker-128162162535121577

http://www.zazzle.com/work_harder_bumper_sticker-128021476474244648

[MH1]

60. LOL ... I think I get your point, but I wouldn't want to be caught

posting one of those! (people actually know me in this town!)

[LynneSin]

11. I think for OWS to be successful they shouldn't be endorsing presidential candidates

That is from both parties.

You put Obama signs out there and then the right-wing screeds will scream it's nothing more than a leftist cause.

You allow Paul supporters (or other candidates) into the group, you'll alienate democrats.

Ron Paul's tenets are straight out of a work of fiction by Ayn Rand. He would dismantle tons of government programs meant to help those that need it and regulate industries that could do a world of hurt if they were not regulated. Is this what OWS is all about? I think not.

[Pacifist Patriot]

20. I agree. I think campaign signs are a bad idea in the OWS movement.

[LynneSin]

38. However.... I do think it's in their best interest to register voters

That's for dang sure!

[MH1]

41. Yeah, I'm going to write 'Occupy the Voting Booth Nov. 8" next time I go by the Idea Wall

:)

[Pacifist Patriot]

47. Definitely!

[Pacifist Patriot]

49. Could not agree more.

[MH1]

27. Thanks, Lynne, I agree wholeheartedly with your post.

I didn't see any Obama signs there, and frankly, I didn't miss them. It didn't occur to me that Obama signs should be there; it occurred to me that Ron Paul signs should NOT be there. And especially not on the most prominent corner for a large swath of commuters.

[kctim]

14. Can you claim to represent the 99%

if you divide, discriminate and attempt to censor the 99%?

[MH1]

17. OWS Philly doesn't represent the 99%. I walked through there yesterday

and I pass by it every week day, and they don't look at all like the people I see as I commute through Philly (on ALL modes) or work with or near (at an off-center-city area that is NOT 'posh' or even close).

I generally support OWS - or thought I did. But if it is a campaign for Ron Paul, which is the way it appears to someone walking past that corner in Philly, I'm done. (In reality, I'm trying to come up with suggestions to deal with the issue, which I'll then propose to the organizers in Philly. I think rotating tents is one I will suggest. Also, there shouldn't be political campaign ads there at all, for any candidate.)

[kctim]

22. OWS supports and represents different people now?

I'm in KC, not Philly, so am curious as to where OWS is going.

[MH1]

28. I'm speaking literally that the folks inhabiting Dilworth plaza don't appear to be a cross-section

of 99% of the population.

I think my meaning was unclear and probably still is now. Anyway another way to say it might be, the folks at Dilworth plaza do not experience life as I do, or as most of 'the 99%' do. In my assessment.

That doesn't mean they don't represent the concerns and issues of the 99%. I believe that is generally the goal of the movement, including most of the OWS Philly folks, and I support that, and that's why I have a problem with the prominent position of the Paulbots. Because following Paul's ideology will NOT help the 99%.

[MH1]

23. I want to clarify ....

other than Paulbots or tea partiers or other trojan horse types there - which are not that many, just that the Paulbots have a prominent location - I do not mean IN ANY WAY to disparage the OWS folks. They seem like good people who do represent a lot of my ideals. But you know what? If they do represent my ideals, they aren't representative of 99% of this country. More like 40%. And the lifestyles they are exhibiting, while I'm not criticizing, are NOT what most people experience on a daily basis.

[McDiggy]

32. I think you are overreacting.

I drove by early this morning. It's a single tent on the corner a few tents down from the donation tent. I wouldn't get worked up by one tent out of a hundred. This is a nonpartisan movement for 99% of the people. Whether or not you like it, Ron Paul supporters aren't in that 1%. Let them add to the numbers.

[MH1]

34. they aren't in the 1%, but are shills for the 1%

whether they know it or not.

You may be right that I'm overreacting. I'm getting a lot of constructive feedback in this thread, which was my purpose in posting it.

I still wish the PaulBots would just go away though. Or better yet, wise up and tear down that stupid tent and really start helping the 99%. :)

[LynneSin]

40. So you don't think the fact that Paul would disable government laws & programs...

meant to protect working class people as not being representative of the 1%.

The 1% would jump for joy with Ron Paul in the White House. Paul would disband the EPA and degulate dozens of environmental regulations that are meant to protect working class people but would net the 1% billions.

Do you think Ron Paul, an anti-government activist, would reinstate the Glass-Steagall Act (or pass a similiar bill that would be similiar)? Highly doubtful - that's just more regulations from the government even if it's the root of the problem the 99% is protesting.

You know Hitler was kind to children & animals plus he was a vegetarian. Just because I too happen to like children & animals or would like to be a vegetarian doesn't mean I'd support Hitler.

[coalition_unwilling]

62. Hitler was kind to *SOME* children. Jewish children, um, not so much - n/t

[LynneSin]

63. Point taken but on the surface to your average non-jewish german....

just saying.

Alot of people look at the surface and have no clue as to what is happening deep down inside.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

21. Ron Paul and his ardent supporters are whores for the 1%.

They are trying to co-opt the movement like the just like Cocks co-opted the teahadists. They can go back to to being teabaggers for all I care.

[MH1]

24. Thank you. nt.

[booley]

30. The cure for bad speech is MORe speech

so the saying goes.

I like your idea about rotating tents so everybody has a chance.

But we can't censor the Paulites. If anything that would only make problem worse. It makes it look like we cant' counter their message so we have to hide it.

Better to show why they are wrong. Might even convert a few in the process.

My understanding of OWS and the franchises is they are attempting what's known as Swarm Intelligence. In other words, we get as many different people together to hash out a solution and course of action. This is unlike a mob where a few leaders dictate the direction and the crowd is there to reinforce it (that's what happened to the tea party and why for all it's rhetoric about changing the system, it just ended up protecting the conservative status quo). But a consequence is that it has to listen to people most may disagree with, even hate before it gets to that consensus. But I think Occupy Philly can find a way to give the Paulites a chance ot speak and then not only not be corrupted but even use that as a chance to show why the "Your On Your Own" mentality doesn't work.

I think most people get that for all the hoopla they raise about big banks, Libertarianism is a big part of the reason why the banks could expect to get bailed out to begin with. It's why the top 1% pay big money to get libertarian ideas made into political policy. Libertarianism creates the very environment where the top 1% can grab everything and have the rest of us fighting for crumbs. And their excuse that we just haven't tried "real" libertarianism is looking more and more like weak tea.

[MH1]

36. Thanks, excellent post and good ideas.

:)

[jmg257]

31. Curious - is the Paul tent a part of OWS, or does it just happen to be there too? nt

[MH1]

35. Interesting question. It wasn't there until OWS.

However, how does one say that it is 'part' of OWS, or just happened to exploit the opportunity to piggyback on the attention OWS is getting?

I'm going to check into that question when I return.

[jmg257]

37. Thanks, makes sense - maybe you can ask the people manning the tent 'who they are'? Good luck! nt

[LynneSin]

50. I honestly don't think the 2 are hand in hand

Ron Paul supporters know there are a few key issues they have in common with the OWS and are hoping that the people they meet at the OWS are too stupid to find out the rest of Paul's stances.

Like I said in another post it's a bit like Hitler. People who supported him always commented about how he was good to children & animals plus creating jobs for Germany. But those were people who had no clue what Hitler was beneath the surface for I suspect that alot of Germans would have stopped supporting him if they knew what Hitler was really doing. BTW I'm not saying that Pauls intentions are anywhere close to those of Hitler's - just that you really need to dig deep into a candidate to find out about all policies, not just the happy ones they show you.

A simple solution is this - I would ban all campaign signs from OWS locations. It's one thing if a bunch of Paul supporters (or any other campaign supporter) shows up for the big events that happen on the weekend but for the day to day OWS happenings - best to leave the candidates out of the area.

[jmg257]

54. That's what I was thinking..& if so, hard to ban someone else from a public space you're occupying.

eom

[LynneSin]

56. And there lies the dilemma

How do you politely ask those not really a part of your group to leave without looking like an asshole.

[philly_bob]

42. See my comment in another thread on Paul's anti-science stand

I think it is typically right-wing smart-ass (like James O'Keefe and his "journalism") to grab the best corner at OccupyPhilly, when they are actually proponents of the hands-off regulatory style that caused the financial crisis.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x801088

That said, I'd like to see it discussed some time in General Assembly.

[MH1]

46. Thanks

It'll be a few days before I can get there but I do intend to figure out how to get the issue addressed. Maybe it will happen before I get back. I'm glad I'm not the only one who sees the problem.

[Zorra]

44. Yes. Here is a relevant post from a few days ago:

snip---
But I really wanted to tell them to fuck off and go away in the worst way.

The Democratic Party got co-opted by conservatives, and we are not going to let them take OWS from us before we can close.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x2124824

[Shagbark Hickory]

45. My thoughts are that the movement is not only a great opportunity for the RP camp but all the other

candidates running against obama.

Edit: It's also a great opportunity for obama, btw, only we know he aint gonna do shit.

[Douglas Carpenter]

48. at every major protest I have ever been at - there have been all kinds of groups

every sect of Socialist and Communist, usually some really off beat New Ager types, pacifist groups and not infrequently Libertarians - especially at anti-war protest. Many Libertarians actually come close to agreeing with the classic Marxist saying, "Government is the executive committee of the bourgeoisie." They would frequently argue that it is inevitable that big moneyed interest will end up calling the shots wherever regulations are introduced. Many Libertarians maintain that the only way take away corporate control of the government is to take away government. I obviously don't share their point of view. But, I can see how some of their thinking is at its core not that different than some aspects of classic left-wing thinking.

But all of that aside. All kinds of groups - some of them pretty wacky - show up at these kinds of events. It's nothing to worry about.

[LynneSin]

51. To me the OWS has two major parts

It seems now every weekend they setup major protests which allows us folks with jobs during the week (or other commitments) to show up for a few hours and be a part of OWS. But at the end of the day the masses drive home leaving behind the other half of OWS - those who are spending day-in and day-out at the OWS sites.

For those weekly big events, I don't really care who shows up and if I was there I would do my best not to march near people who clearly do not represent what I stand for. But it's the day-to-day operations that personally, would be best to be devoid of any political party or candidate. To me 99% means they represent just about everyone in the USA regardless of party. The moment they align themselves with a candidate they start to lose the '99%' mentality.

[Tatiana]

55. I have taken down many Ron Paul signs in downtown Chicago.

Especially down LaSalle Street which is where the protestors march a lot of the time.

I don't know that anything in particular can be done about it, but I do understand where you're coming from. The Chi-town GA does NOT support the Ron Paul campaign or ANY campaign for that matter. However, they cannot force people to cease supporting their favorite candidate for elective office.

[blm]

57. Ron Paul works for NO regulations for corporations and MORE regulations on peoples' private behavior

He and his followers are Duplicitous or....just plain Dumb. Typical sophomoric Randians.

[MH1]

58. Exactly.

They want people to be completely 'free' to exploit other people for maximum profit. 'free' to enjoy life, though, not so much.

[LynneSin]

64. They hope that since they do agree with a few points the OWS belive in...

that the OWS will be clueless and ignore everything else.

I suspect the OWS gang is smarter than that!