Active discussions

Help protect children from gaming harms.

Take our survey

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Politics
Original poster

Occupy London

288 replies

glasnost · 07/10/2011 12:38

p.twimg.com/AbGk1-FCQAAjoi7.png

Well, why not MNers?

What have your kids got to lose? In NY there are alot of families with children protesting and occupying that doesn't get mentioned in the mainstream press.

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Original poster
glasnost · 31/10/2011 10:53

Thanks Betelguese for your link to the Occupied Times - is fantastic.

There's another thread currently "recruiting" MNters to the Occupation and I believe some are going along tomorrow.

Women and children are the primary victims of this iniquitous system so I'm literally AGOG when some on here are so snidey, dismissive and downright nasty about who actually gets off their arse and does something to protest. In a world where a million (I was there) hit the streets to protest the Iraq War and Blair and his cronies literally IGNORED the mass demo is it a surprise pple take to camping out in stationary protest?? What else are we supposed to do?

I agree with you too that the onus shouldn't be solely on the banks, the banks (to be repeated Quasimodo-like) as if they subsist in a hermetically sealed bubble. They don't. It's the capitalist system that facilitated this folly and is clapped out and corrupt.

newwave you sound so disillusioned and deflated. Sorry about that. You should get yourself along to an Occupation quicksmart - does wonders for the spirits as it reconnects you to your fellow human beings too in reclaimed public space. I suspect THAT is what unnerves the powers that be the most.

OP posts:
Betelguese · 31/10/2011 00:03

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

newwave · 30/10/2011 23:21

We are electing those politicians - do not forget this. If you want a change you need to be part of it.

Trouble is they are all part of the same problem to one degree or another, I really trusted Blair before he came to power and Clegg sold out quicker than I could believe when he got a sniff of power.

Say what you like about the Tories and believe me I hate them with a passion you cannot comprehend but at least you know where you are with the nasty hateful scum.

Betelguese · 30/10/2011 23:11

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

newwave · 30/10/2011 22:40

I look on the idealism of the protesters and remember when I was the same but I am saddened because I know that nothing will really change, maybe a few crumbs and lip service will be shown with politicians of all stripes climbing on the bandwagon.

The elites and their bought and paid for front menthe politicians won?t allow any meaningful changes.

Sad to say the only language that will get the attention of the elites will be violence.

Betelguese · 30/10/2011 22:31

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

newwave · 30/10/2011 21:08

I see Boris and co are blaming the protestors for the problem; it appears to be they are blaming the fire (protestors) and not the arsonists (bankers) who caused the blaze (paraphrased from CES)

Betelguese · 30/10/2011 20:51

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Betelguese · 30/10/2011 20:47

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Original poster
glasnost · 30/10/2011 10:48

Christian groups are organising a prayer ring to prevent any eviction taking place, too.

OP posts:
Original poster
glasnost · 30/10/2011 10:47

Don't usually like warmongering Rawnsley but this Op Ed is great.

The sly, dismissive so called adults' patronising of the occupation versus the mature politeness of the younger occupiers.

www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/oct/30/andrew-rawnsley-occupy-protesters-grown-up

OP posts:
EdithWeston · 28/10/2011 22:29

Yes, that's been bubbling away all day.

As several posters have said on the various threads about this, the protesters were very unwise to have painted themselves into a corner. They really should have reconfigured the camp immediately on the closure of the Cathedral to have averted this. The "own goal" warnings were well placed.

Disputandum · 28/10/2011 22:18

The BBC is reporting that the Cathedral and City of London Corporation have voted to begin legal action to evict the protestors.

meditrina · 28/10/2011 13:36

The health and safety had been dealt with - the camp as changed its layout and the Cathedral has reopened.

It's a shame that they did not do this earlier. Very silly of them.

Original poster
glasnost · 28/10/2011 13:28

I never associated him with the movement anyway.

OP posts:
Original poster
glasnost · 28/10/2011 13:27

Clutching at Haws are you? It's Friday today and you drag out a 5 day old post. Weird.

www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/oct/28/st-pauls-injunction-evict-occupy-london

Seems you've been missing quite a bit too, meditrina, such as the foregone conclusion here. I posted re. the inevitable outcome once the elf and safety smokescreen was set up.

OP posts:
meditrina · 28/10/2011 12:49

"Maybe I'm missing something here but whoever associated Haw to the Occupy London protest anyway?"

Um, you did. Your post at Sun 23-Oct-11 13:37:04.

I support the Parliament Square protest, even after Haws death. It's focused, with specified aims, is targeted at the people who could, if minded, make those aims happen, and has not caused any losses to random third parties.

Original poster
glasnost · 28/10/2011 10:24

If there were they would be infiltrators, claig, which only people (and not sheeple) of strong resolve and autonomous thought could counter.

BUT bank bailouts were the equivalent of Marx's tiger (capitalism) eating the tail of the state before consuming itself and cannot be taken out of the context of the system that generated the problem in the first place so to overly fixate on just that would be reductive I feel. (I'm not a spokesperson).

And claig if you wanna know more about the movement why dontcha get yourself down to one? There are Occupations going on all over - not just in London. www.occupybritain.co.uk/

OP posts:
claig · 28/10/2011 10:13

'The movement is in no way against the Church'

Is the movement united? Does it have common or disparate aims?
My guess is that there are some influential members of the movement who want to deflect the movement from focusing on bank bailouts.

Original poster
glasnost · 28/10/2011 10:09

This is becoming obfuscation here. The movement is in no way against the Church. They're out cleaning the steps and area in preparation for its reopening. It's the Church's hierarchy (after an initial welcome from the now resigned Canon Fraser) that are against the protest but can't come out and say it explicitly as that would bely their true credentials so spurious reasons are given and the Cathedral is dramatically and needlessly closed for a few days.

Once again the reasons why the protest began are obfuscated. And the fact the movement as a whole is gaining in momentum globally.

OP posts:
Original poster
glasnost · 28/10/2011 10:04

The Corporation of the City of London own it. The square mile's local authority.

From wikipedia:

The City of London Corporation has long come in for criticism due to its unusual form of governance.
"The corporation is a group of hangers-on, who create what is known as the best dining club in the City ... a rotten borough." - John McDonnell, during the debates on the Ward Elections Act.[15]
"Nowadays, with its Lord Mayor, its Beadles, Sheriffs and Aldermen, its separate police force and its select electorate of freemen and liverymen, the City of London is an anachronism of the worst kind. The Corporation, which runs the City like a one-party mini-state, is an unreconstructed old boys' network whose medievalist pageantry camouflages the very real power and wealth which it holds." - pp110, Rough Guide to England, 2006
An attempt was made to amalgamate the corporation with the local government structures serving the rest of London at the end of the 19th century. A Royal Commission on the Amalgamation of the City and County of London reported a mechanism for this to be achieved in 1894. However, the amalgamation did not take place.

OP posts:
claig · 28/10/2011 10:04

Many progressives are against religion and the Church, so this is a double whammy for them. Criticise the Church and neutralise the protestors, thus helping their friends, the bankers.

claig · 28/10/2011 10:02

I wouldn't be surprised if the protestors haven't been set up by progressives within their movement to lead them up the garden path to St Paul's and to deflect attention from their friends, the bankers.

claig · 28/10/2011 09:59

I don't really understand it. Who owns the streets, the pavements, the lampposts and the squares? Who pays to fix the potholes and to clear the square of litter? Is it the Church or is it the people?

Nesbo · 28/10/2011 09:52

Oops, for "woke" read "whole"