What do you think of the ‘occupy wall street’ movement?
In so far as the occupy movement is protesting at the deep seated corruption within the existing financial system; then I have a lot of sympathy with it.
And, as is often the case, it seems that there is far more at play.
It seems entirely likely that the occupy movement is the child of a movement call anonymous – who in their last communication repeated the refrain:
“We are anonymous.
We are legion.
We do not forgive.
We do not forget.
It seems that the occupy movement is the first of 3 promised actions by this group.
I find it a bit concerning.
While I have some sympathy with the anonymous movement, I also have some very big differences.
It does not seem possible to me to achieve stability long term without the use of forgiveness.
It also concerns me that anonymous are not offering a strategic alternative to the existing system.
Thus it seems quite possible that the whole anonymous/occupy phenomenon could be a product of the worst aspects of the existing system designed simply to identify opposition so that it can be neutralised.
[As I’ve said many times, just because I’m paranoid, doesn’t mean they’re not out to get me 😉 ]
As the occupy movement is not clearly spelling out exactly what is not working about Wall St (the fact that the unstable money creation schemes that the financial community is producing are not adding tot he real wealth of humanity, but are simply diluting it, and as such, are essentially theft) – it leaves one wondering.
Having read a lot of their literature, I think that there is some real power in the on the ground decision making processes that they have adopted, and there are already many models in “stone age” cultures for such systems.
It seems to me that www.solnx.org is still a far more productive plan than anything yet offered as an alternative by the occupy movement, and it is still very much in the infant stage.
I am interested to see what the next 2 stages of the anonymous plan are.
My concern is, that if they are real, and they are taking on the worst aspects of the capitalist system head on, then it is a very dangerous, very high risk strategy for everyone.
I do not see how it is possible to be non-violent without forgiveness. This seems such a basic strategic issue, that in my mind it calls into doubt the whole thing. It seems all too likely that it is yet another false promise of real hope for those who have least in society -and that angers me, as it promises so much more.
I wouldn’t necessarily characterise anonymous as a violent hate group. They seem to be a communicating group of anarchists, with no central power structure and little or no physical communication.
As anarchists they are by necessary implication anti authoritarian.
As such, they will be seen by any authoritarian structure (church or state or whatever) as a threat, and will therefore likely be demonized, as something they are not, as a result.
In such a circumstance, I would not place much reliance on any utterance coming from any “authority” about them.
Certainly I would expect those who were caught to be jailed; and I suspect that if you went in with an open mind, and spent a couple of hours talking to one of those in prison, you might leave with a different perspective.
And I would also expect that hidden in the anonymity would be some true sociopaths – that is one of the great weaknesses of anonymity.
I have known people both in government “black ops” work, and in deeply paranoid counter cultures. Each nice enough individuals on their own terms, and each profoundly ignorant of the paradigms of the other.
I am committed to creating a world where both can coexist in peace – which may sound a little strange, and it is in a sense, and it is also part of the infinite diversity that, it seems to me, is our only truly stable path to long term peace and prosperity for all.