What the underlying basis of #OWS is and why it's not the Tea Party

[FluffyMcDeath]

What is the underlying basis:

Why it isn't like the Tea Party:

The Tea Party is nationalistic, jingoistic, owned and US only.
#OWS is part of a global rebellion.

The Tea Party is a bunch of scared people who know the US is falling apart and wants the military and big business to save them. They tend to be older and better off, depend on the "system" even though it's killing them and they don't want to rock the boat too much.
OWS are a bunch of people who have the courage to stand up to the system based on an understanding of how they got hosed and who did it and the fact that they are much closer to having nothing left to lose.

There's no straight line down the middle of that, Tea Partiers cross over, but that's the basic divide.

 

[redrumloa]

#OWS is part of a global rebellion.

New world order = oppressive communism.

No thanks.

 

[FluffyMcDeath]

New world order = oppressive communism.

Just because you've use some words doesn't make it any less mad than pooping yourself and dribbling. The elites' propaganda has got you really scared. Soon you'll be ready to do something stupid for the cause.

 

[faethor]

New world order = oppressive communism.

So tired of the failed Communist and Elite charges. Nothing less than the other side's use of hate filled jingoisms. It's fairly useful to avoid an honest discussion / debate on the issues.

 

[redrumloa]

Just because you've use some words doesn't make it any less mad than pooping yourself and dribbling. The elites' propaganda has got you really scared. Soon you'll be ready to do something stupid for the cause.

I would think of all people here, you should see a coordinated action. Then again, you believe in the concept of communism just that it has not been implemented properly, so any move towards communism you will see as a positive regardless of the means to get there.

 

[FluffyMcDeath]

I would think of all people here, you should see a coordinated action. Then again, you believe in the concept of communism just that it has not been implemented properly, so any move towards communism you will see as a positive regardless of the means to get there.

I believe that a small number of people shouldn't be able to amass the majority of the power. I believe that people are each different with different abilities and different work ethics and that a system that rewards us on our efforts is a good thing but it is also necessary that those who try to freeload are punished - and by freeload I mean those who make money on their money instead of actively producing something useful. Real things are wealth, money isn't - though it is used to claim real wealth.

I believe that people should work for their income, not have other people work for it, and that incomes should not be so uneven that a few people could acquire and wield with their incomes undue power over the rest of the people. I believe that a small number of people making all of the decisions is as bad for a country whether it is done by monopoly power of communism or monopoly power of capitalism. Systems are more resistant to collapse when they are made of more but less powerful parts.

I believe that there are multiple coordinated actions, some of them nefarious, but often those ones require a source of money. I can also see large crowd actions which are much less controllable and that is where the OWS is, and it's what makes it scary to the establishment. They are undercutting it because it is scarey to them. The establishment were able to mostly co-opt the Tea Party movement because the Tea Party movement was working through the normal political system which the establishment already understands and owns. The elites (and I really use that word only to mean exactly what it means) neutralized the Tea Party by attacking it at the political level that it was envisioned to operate by sticking their own candidates on top of the Tea Party and then using their considerable influence machine (the media they own and the PR companies they own) to legitimize the candidates.

OWS has far too many groups piling into it for any of them to take control, and so long as they don't allow a leader then there is no one who can take it over. It is a citizens movement and relies on the individual acts of millions of people all acing in a social interest but each individually without direction but under a philosophy.

When millions of people try to do what's right they don't all have to agree on exactly what it is that is right, but the mere fact that they have taken on the responsibility can be transformative.

This is not to say that the OWS is immune to takeover the way the Tea Party was taken over, but it can't happen in the same way at least. The dynamics are much harder to co-opt.