Webdiary - Founded and Inspired by Margo Kingston

Okay, Richard, there was never a reply button, I never saw a "Log in to Reply" notice, and none of the comments here are inset and ordered to associate them with earlier posts, as though they were replies or responses to them.  Fine.

Can you recommend a psychiatrist? 

Richard:  Your memory's fine.  As you say, we're being helped to keep the conversations going by a kind volunteer, and very glad to be able to continue to provide the opportunity.

Okay, bad choice of word. But Fiona, I used to see an Edit button beside something I had written, and I assumed, was told by the site, that any such edited thing would again go to the moderators.

After all, there was once in the English language the word "edition".  Back in those days it was possible for something that had been published to be revised and published again.

Back then, they called the second publication of the thing a second "edition".

I don't understand why the practice has receded into history or why you consider it "completely inappropriate".

As I say, there was once an "Edit" button.  And there was once a "Reply" button.  Both are gone, and so has the shortcut to an article by clicking on its title at the side of the first screen.

Your "wonderful and friendly nerd person" needs to be doing a lot more.  Sorry for the tone of that, I'm sure he or she is providing a free voluntary service, but I'll let it stand.

I really don't know why you don't look into Linux, which is free, install it on any old computer, download, compile and install free blog software such as WordPress, and become independent of your "friendly nerd". 

 Richard: Michael I'm pretty sure that Reply button hasn't been around for years.  At any rate the editorial settings are now (especially in such a legally "interesting" era) as they need to be.

Alan, it would appear you have not got the courage to admit you got it wrong (as usual) regarding the "unlawfulness" of the students' behaviour at UC Davis.

Here is a video the students put together, which includes an interview with a police chief who adds new meaning to the term "fuckwit", a shell-shocked but extremely apologetic chancellor desperate not to join the unemployed, and a bunch of peaceful kids.

I'll leave it up to others to decide whether the title of this post is worthy of our resident bear hunter, but it was the best iJustin could do.

Fiona: Psych to iJustin, as you were, lad... ;)

In case Scott Dunmore doesn't revisit his "missing the point" post, I have the following message for him:

Scott, if you do that one more time, I shall block you. It is totally unacceptable to change a published post except via the moderators.

I thought that this loophole only existed on Webdiarists' own threads, but apparently not.

Please everyone, self-editing once a post has been published is just not on. We moderators do actually read what you write, and only publish when we are satisfied that the post does not contravene Webdiary's own etiquette, not to mention the more important matter of legal liability.

Compassion the American way: 

As cities around the country have swept Occupy Wall Street camps from their plazas and parks in recent weeks, a number of mayors and city officials have argued that by providing shelter to the homeless, the camps are endangering the public and even the homeless themselves.

Yet in many of those cities, services for the homeless are severely underfunded. The cities have spent millions of dollars to police and evict the protesters, but they've been shutting down shelters and enacting laws to prohibit homeless from sleeping overnight in public.

In Oakland, Atlanta, Denver and Portland, Ore., there are at least two homeless people for every open bed in the shelter system, according to the most recent data from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. In Salt Lake City, Utah, and Chapel Hill, N.C. -- two other cities that have evicted protesters from their encampments -- things are better but far from ideal. In Chapel Hill, according to the HUD study, there are 121 beds for 135 homeless people, and in Salt Lake City, 1,627 for 1,968.

Heather Maria Johnson, a civil rights attorney at the National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty, said most cities in the U.S. lack adequate affordable housing, emergency or transitional housing, or other social services for people who are either homeless or are in danger of losing their homes. "This was true before the current economic crisis and remains true today, particularly in areas that have cut social services due to budget concerns," Johnson said.

Today the USA, tomorrow Australia.

Sleep well, Alan Curran.

Good article by Naomi Wolf:

The shocking truth about the crackdown on Occupy

The violent police assaults across the US are no coincidence. Occupy has touched the third rail of our political class's venality

...

So, when you connect the dots, properly understood, what happened this week is the first battle in a civil war; a civil war in which, for now, only one side is choosing violence. It is a battle in which members of Congress, with the collusion of the American president, sent violent, organised suppression against the people they are supposed to represent. Occupy has touched the third rail: personal congressional profits streams. Even though they are, as yet, unaware of what the implications of their movement are, those threatened by the stirrings of their dreams of reform are not.

Sadly, Americans this week have come one step closer to being true brothers and sisters of the protesters in Tahrir Square. Like them, our own national leaders, who likely see their own personal wealth under threat from transparency and reform, are now making war upon us.

Don't you think it is about time we face up to the bleeding obvious regarding POTUS? He's a fucking fraud, and sooo very silent about the Occupy "problem". 

BTW - did you know that the members of the US congress made themselves exempt from insider trading laws? They can quite happily accept IPOs and buy shares in companies that will be affected by their legislation. Now that is a benefit worth fighting for.

This is getting better by the day.

A positive interview about the Occupy Movement. For those who watch (Alan, Geoff) you may note that each time police have done stupid stuff it only "doubled the turnout" and "energised" the participants.

That said, the lad being interviewed said many police were on side, also many servicemen have had enough.

If the Occupy Movement can get the sympathies of the military and cops then we are looking at a whole new ball game - a rather exciting one.

If you happen to watch the interview the guy asking the questions once suggested that if everyone in the US (300 million people) bought just 1oz of physical silver it would bring down JP Morgan and an unknown number of related corporate counter-parties.

It makes sense, and if you check the numbers (of available silver) as compared to the number of times the underlying derivative (ag) is hedged (up to x 100 or more) then all hell could break out in the derivatives and futures market.

The devils metal (silver) is the canary in the derivatives cage. If the ETFs (run by the banks) have naked short sold silver to the extend analysts claim, then it would not be very difficult to bring down a corrupt bank, along with the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, and the CFTC which has the responsibility, as a regulator, of making sure everything is kosher - which they don't, because they are in bed with the banks and corrupt brokers; the most recent of which, run by one of Obama's fund raisers, just stole $1.2 billion out of the trading accounts of his many thousands of clients, accounts that were supposed to be untouchable, like a bank. Such has never happened before, not even in the depression, but it has now and put the wind right through the market. The perpetrator, Obama's fund raising mate (ex-Goldman Sachs) will walk scott free no doubt - but should go to gaol.

Anyway, if only 1% of the 99% went out and invested in just one ounce of silver it would make quite a difference. And if the Occupy Movement could find someone to trust (financially) then their investment could be used to attack the highly leveraged (corrupt) ETF's in a co-ordinated, and devastating manner (however, such a "Trust" would also become a target).

At worst Occupy would push the price of silver up; at best would be to expose the corruption and co-operation between the market manipulators and the regulatory bodies, who spend most of the time in bed.

The number of Comex open futures (5,000oz) contracts (at present) standing for March 12 delivery = 45,175 or nearly 226 million ounces of silver (about a third of annual production). Amount of underlying derivative to cover the trades, nowhere near that, not even close. 

What happens when they can't honour the contracts?

If they don't have the silver then you have the option of getting get paid out in cash (not suppoosed to happen but it does), a shit load of cash, way above spot (to shut you up).

And if you demand physical delivery? That's when it will get really interesting, because the game is up, and all the king's horses and all the king's men won't be any use whatsoever.

Anyway, that's just a bit of a dream, and sometimes it is good to dream.

The Arab Spring has become simply one part of what is now very clearly a worldwide unrest occurring everywhere: Oxi in Greece, indignados in Spain, students in Chile, the Occupy movements that have now spread to 800 cities in North America and elsewhere, strikes in China and demonstrations in Hong Kong, multiple happenings across Africa.

The "1968 current" is expanding - despite repression, despite concessions, despite co-option.

And geopolitically, across the Arab world, the success of the various players has been limited, and in some cases counterproductive. Tahrir Square has become a symbol across the world. Yes, many Islamist movements have been able to express themselves openly in Arab states where they could not do so earlier. But so have the secular left forces. The trade unions are rediscovering their historic role.

Those who believe that Arab unrest, that world unrest, is a passing moment will discover in the next major bubble burst (which we can anticipate quite soon) that the "1968 current" will no longer be so easily contained.

Immanuel Wallerstein is a professor in the department of sociology at Yale University and author of some 30 books, including The Modern World System - published in four volumes, with a further two anticipated. Prof Wallerstein's decades of work, critical of global capitalism and supporting 'anti-systemic movements' have led to him being recognised as a world-renowned expert in social analysis.

As worldwide unrest gathers momentum, who knows what the future will hold? It will certainly be a roller coaster ride.

Everyone wants a voice so it will be chaos. Tyrants all over are in trouble.

Only global democracy will channel the unleashed energy into global good.

Dear Mr Curran, so nice to see you back, and not only on-topic (for a change), but also - as always - spreading your customary sweetness and light.

This is video and pictures of Police Lieutenant John Pike who pepper-sprayed the students at UC Davis on November 18th, 2011. Look at how casual and confident he does his “job” of putting peaceful protesting students in the hospital.

Not so fun fact: Lt. John Pike is using military grade pepper spray that is meant to be sprayed at a distance of 15 ft. Commercial pepper spray is 1,000 times hotter than a jalapeno pepper. It has been linked to cardiac, respiratory and neurological problems, and even sudden death.

This video shows police using pepper spray on students peacefully sitting down on the pavement.

How can the US lecture, Burma, China or anyone else on human rights?

Democracy is under threat and we are letting US marines into Australia?

What a quaint idea, using the army to actually protect the people? I don't think it will catch on somehow.

Things seem to have changed since the last comments here. The authorities, worldwide, have come down on the sit ins in a coordinated move. Sad to see the authorities making war on their own people, sometimes violently - but news does get out, despite the cowardly Murdoch-inspired press boycott of fair coverage of the Occupy events.

I disagree that it is leaderless, it has its articulators in the form of Jeffrey Sachs, Stiglitz and others of the calibre; rational top economists and commentators and the villain is very plain to see: globalising neoliberalism in the more extreme form it has taken this century.

Whether people talk about the Euro crisis, Third World rebellions, enviro, protracted recessions even in the USA itself, famines, the continued arrogance and greed of people best represented here by Joyce and Qantas, wars kept running for reasons opposite to those stated by politicians, corrosion of the justice system and ongoing social infrastructure cuts across the planet, they are talking of the same thing, but describing different symptoms related to the same disease - the takeover of the political apparatus by politicans and big business.

They don't want revolution, they just want their democracy back and the system working rationally again; no confusion there.

Humanity has come to exist for the convenience of the one per cent, but the economy should work for the people, not people as serfs for corrupt, ignorant, arrogant oligarchs.

 The idea of a structureless leaderless movement sounds rather sexy in its own way.

How do the powers that be co-ordinate PR attacks on a movement that has 1,027 gripes?

How do the powers that be decapitate, and cauterize a movement without a single head, but thousands, or millions of heads?

In a word, what is it that makes the punters angry?

Trust (or actually the lack of trust) - we all know this.

You see, these days it has become apparent to all and sundry that the taxpayer is getting shafted; many wouldn't have a clue about how the powers that be go about it, but that doesn't really matter. What the punters know is the greedy bastards, who have control of global finances, fucked up badly and have been rewarded for doing so by their leaders, while the taxpayer foots the bill.

Critics of this movement claim the protesters are ill equipped to understand the complexities that have caused this economic and social melt down, or whatever.  But you don't have to have intimate knowledge of nuclear physics to know a fusion bomb makes a really big bang.

And what is now known by all and sundry, to some degree or another, is that those who lead us, and those who have engineered this financial fuck up are not to be trusted; they act only for their greedy interests, and will continue to do so unless made to stop.

And that is the guts of it.

The best thing that could happen is for the whole show to be demolished, the greedy bastards locked up for a very long time (or made to pay back the cash they have stolen), and then, and only then, could we  rebuild an equitable financial structure underpinned with integrity, and trust. 

Shit! it's nearly opening time, and it's Friday, time to occupy the pub - now that's what iJustin calls a protest!

And of course you are all invited to join...as long as you shout, hehe.

The Occupy Wall Street movements and climate action movements stand on the same moral ground and affirm the same moral principles: It’s wrong to wreck the world. It’s wrong to wreck the health and hopes of others. An economic system that forces most of the people to bear the impacts of the recklessness of a few powerful profiteers, to assume the burdens of others’ privilege, and to pay the real costs of destructive industries in the currency of their health and the hopes of their children—that system is immoral. And when, to enrich a powerful few, that system threatens to disrupt forever the great planetary cycles that support all the lives on Earth? This is moral monstrosity on a cosmic scale.

If you are wondering why the occupy movement is growing rapidly around the globe, it is because more and more people are rejecting the old economy and looking for a more moral way of living.  

"They have become little more than bullies with guns, and if there is anything the Arab Spring has taught us, it is that guns are utterly useless against an idea."

I have just caught up with this thread and this caught my eye. It's from a  quote John linked.

Someone capable of writing this really has no idea about anything at all. It pretty much sums up why this idiotic movement really is something contemptiible. It's a pity they hide behind masks and psuedonyms when  they sprout disgusting and offensive crap like this.

What kind of a spoiled moronic mind, of any age, could really compare the situation of these people to what is going on in the streets of Damascus as we speak and not see at least how insulting and offensive it is to those unarmed civilians right now being butchered by the battle tanks of one of  the murderous tyrants that rule pretty much all that part of the world from Tehran to Beiruit and pretty much always have?

Bear it mind that if the phrase "bullies with guns" means anything at all, it means the cops standing around doing their jobs making sure everybody is OK. And it means the militaries of the liberal democracies that guarantee the rights of gutless dickheads like this bloke to say poisonous muck like this  and the men and women who staff them. Three of whom just now came home in coffins  at a ceremony at a military base not far from where I write this. 

Occupy Wall St is simply the kid in the fairy tale, saying what everyone knows but has, until now, been afraid to say – the emperor has no clothes – we have system failure. They’ve given focus to what people were already seeing and feeling; that our problem is not just debt, or inequality, or a recession, or corporate influence or ecological damage. It’s the whole package – the system is profoundly broken and beyond incremental reform.

Paul Gilding points to the fact that the whole system is coming down.

So it’s time for “the 1%” to engage. Ironically, if they listen carefully, they might even find in Occupy Wall St the movement that saves capitalism from itself. Markets when properly constructed and guided by governments who are acting for the collective good are a powerful way to bring many positive things to society. But uncontrolled markets, where greed takes over and social benefit takes a back seat, are more than capable of causing systemic collapse. Then we will all lose and there’ll be nowhere for anyone to hide.

On one level, today's protesters are asking for little: A chance to use their skills, the right to decent work at decent pay, a fairer economy and society. Their hope is evolutionary, not revolutionary. But, on another level, they are asking for a great deal: A democracy where people, not dollars, matter, and a market economy that delivers on what it is supposed to do.

The two are related: As we have seen, unfettered markets lead to economic and political crises. Markets work the way they should only when they operate within a framework of appropriate government regulations; and that framework can be erected only in a democracy that reflects the general interest - not the interests of the 1%. The best government that money can buy is no longer good enough.

Joseph E Stiglitz is University Professor at Columbia University, a Nobel laureate in economics, and the author of Freefall: Free Markets and the Sinking of the Global Economy.

There are many and varied voices which have erupted from captivity which suggest methods by which we the people can reclaim our rightful place as our own rulers and each other's subject at once. In order to reclaim our human dignity and make progress towards natural order, a collective state where the people live in harmony with one another in naturally organized chaos, it is useful to examine the birth of the republics which today have become something grotesque and unrecognizable. Attempt after attempt was made to force monarchs to dictate the will of their subjects, but these attempts were made in ignorance of the fact that the very nature and structure of the kingdoms was not compatible with what the people desired. Facing a global order which could not advance any farther and had reached the end of its useful lifespan, individuals began to realize the increasingly undeniable fact that an entirely new order had to be devised to replace the old kingdoms. We have reached a similar point today. Society's process of collective consciousness and consensus has advanced beyond the point that the republics can follow. In response to this, a select few have hijacked the republics in order to bring them backwards while the people march forwards. As difficult as it is to accept, the time has indeed come to tearfully say goodbye to the republics. They are artifacts of a beautiful age, yet in their age have become irrelevant to the progress of society, and in fact have become a snarling, grotesque weight which fights progress at every turn.

The form of the global order's replacement is not mine to decide. It is not yours, it is not your neighbor's. The global order's form is for the globe to decide collectively. For this reason, my identity will not be disclosed. I will present no idea for the future's form other than the fact that society has advanced beyond the point where the republics can exist in their current form. Go forth, and reclaim your dignity. If you fear the republics, imagine this. You are no longer represented in the republics. Therefore, their laws, their edicts, their decrees have no legitimate authority over you. They are just as illegitimate as if I attempted to dictate the terms of your life from behind my keyboard. They have become little more than bullies with guns, and if there is anything the Arab Spring has taught us, it is that guns are utterly useless against an idea.

This is an extract from a piece on Occupy Wall Street.

It captures the feeling of the moment, and many of us who feel that the nation state(republic) has passed its used by date and something new is slowly developing.  A wonderful vision.

Miliband is careful to avoid endorsing the "long list of diverse and often impractical proposals" of the protesters. But he says their activities are a symptom of a wider crisis caused by record unemployment, rising inflation, squeezed living standards and turmoil in the eurozone which, he says, adds to the "sense that the economy is on the brink".

He says: "Certainly, few people struggling to makes ends meet and worried about what the future holds for their children will have either the time or the inclination to camp outside a cathedral. And many people will not agree with the demands or like the methods of the protesters. But they still present a challenge: to the church and to business – and also to politics."

Ed Milibrand is seeing the occupy movement as a challenge to the system.

It is about time our political leaders took notice of the OWS movement.

As the Occupy movement continues to grow it will certainly have am effect on future elections.

It is great to see a global discussion on politics and serious consideration about ways to improve our political systems.

A grassroots organisation with global reach and instant communications provided by the Internet. It's going to be world-changing.

The fault was, of course, that of successive governments - allowing a private sector monopoly to develop.

I watched the news about engine trouble on an international Qantas flight, that then diverted. The newscaster was smiling!

The Occupy gatherings do not yet constitute a coherent movement with demands, but they are wellsprings of reasonable illusions. Rejecting the political babble around us in election campaigns and on mass media, these gatherings are an experiment in a different kind of public dialogue about our common life, one that can reject the forces of terror deployed by concentrated wealth and power.

With that understanding, the central task is to keep the experiment going, to remember the latent power in people who do not accept the legitimacy of a system.

Robert Jensen is a professor at the School of Journalism at the University of Texas, Austin.

Christians believe in hope, and believe that the hungry should be fed, the outcasts should be cared for. There is much about our hope that is reflected in the appearance of this makeshift camp outside the grandeur of Wren's cathedral. I don't advocate closing its doors because I want to see a church that respects the past, celebrates the diversity of our city, but is not afraid to break out of the status quo and ask serious questions about how we all might do this better. Hopefully, rather than violently removing those protesters, we can work with them to see how this movement might grow, to the benefit of all of us, including the future of St Paul's.

Comments by Alan Green

Reverend Prebendary Alan Green is area dean of Tower Hamlets and rector, St John on Bethnal Green

The occupy movement is a glimmer of hope in a time when hope is in very short supply.

All Christians should think about their belief and ask where would Jesus be in this time of change.

Those on the Left agree with my Anglican minister about the world and moreover believe it can be fixed; albeit without divine help. Conservatives whether religious or not, while equally disgruntled as individuals, are much less prone to believe in the remedial power of collective human endeavour. Conservatives are more accepting of the fates than are those on the Left. Those on the Left are optimists, in the original sense of the word. Conservatives are realists.

Peter Smith (Quadrant Online), commenting on the Occupy movement, is correct to point out that the left are optimists and Conservatives are realists.

Conservatives have no faith in collective human endeavour and believe it is best to do nothing; we should just accept our fate.

Even if that fate may have catastrophic effects on our way of life.

No wonder the Occupy movement has such support: it is human endeavour that has created the world that we live in and it is human endeavour that will have to fix the problems that we have created.

We can choose to continue without change, continue allowing the greedy to to rule.

Or we can look for alternatives that may enable all 7 billion of us to live in a peaceful and sustainable way.

I am an optimist and I believe in human endeavour.

The conservative idea is to do nothing, they say we should leave our future to fate. This will led us to a certain future of death and destruction that is their reality.

No wonder the optimists are screaming for a change of direction and believe humans can do better.

I am not sure where the Occupy movement will take us but we certainly need to change and any cause that is encouraging change is worth listening to.