Occupy London makes its demands

it seems that occupy london has made its demands:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/nov/28/occupy-london-policy-vision-corporations

pretty much what you would expect, though some are pretty vague.

it will be interesting to see if they can offer something less fuzzy in time.

Why should these demands only be leveled at corporations?

What is the point in raising more tax when our government choose to use what they have to make themselves richer, before helping society?

Why should these demands only be leveled at corporations?

 

What is the point in raising more tax when our government choose to use what they have to make themselves richer, before helping society?

It's corporatism that is the root of the problem. Crony capitalism too.

Markets are broken and distorted or rigged in favour of certain corporate interests. Public services are under attack. The welfare system is under attack. We have societal breakdown. We have the repeated threat of the use of troops in civil situations. Our politics is broken - a pathetic government and a pathetic opposition. Society has never been more divided in decades in terms of inequalities. Our infrastructure is crumbling. We are embarking on repeated imperialist wars few of us want or support. We are seeing the government of major western countries taken over by unelected officials.

The root of most of it all are the ridiculous neo experiments of the last 30-40 years where wealth is diverted away from the vast majority of the population and funnelled to the top.

If we were to put together a list of all the things that are wrong it would be as long as your arm. The protest has to gain some focus and the core of the problems (rampant corporatism) is the best place to start.

Is there not "rampant corporatism" also within government?

Why not tear up the unfair contracts with corporations that we are paying through the nose for via Local & National government?

Why not call the bluff on the non-performing, highly paid civil servants?

We should put our own house in order to claim the right to change others.

Is there not "rampant corporatism" also within government?

 

Why not tear up the unfair contracts with corporations that we are paying through the nose for via Local & National government?

 

Why not call the bluff on the non-performing, highly paid civil servants?

 

We should put our own house in order to claim the right to change others.

Indeed there is corporatism within government. But it is interlinked with the banking world, media, judiciary, police etc... You can't take on one bit of it and not the others.

If you could persuade the government to really take on the banks for example, powerful (really powerful) vested interests would mobilise the media and elements within the government to undo any of the cahnges before they happened. Just an example of one of the corporatist blocs we have in this country: political-banking-media, with the three elements acting closely together.

What is the point in raising more tax when our government choose to use what they have to make themselves richer, before helping society?

How are they doing that?

We have the repeated threat of the use of troops in civil situations.

when?

Our politics is broken - a pathetic government and a pathetic opposition.

we voted for them...........

We are embarking on repeated imperialist wars few of us want or support.

apart from the war agianst Iraq which wars?

Why not tear up the unfair contracts with corporations that we are paying through the nose for via Local & National government?

which contracts are unfair?

no one put a gun to the heads of the local & national governments to force them to sign any particular contract

Why not call the bluff on the non-performing, highly paid civil servants?

what about the non-performing low paid civil servants?

when?

 

 

we voted for them...........

 

 

 

apart from the war agianst Iraq which wars?

1

August riots - cameron wanted to bring troops in but was persuaded not to

Strikes - troops may be used in airports

Olympics 2012 - plans to use troops

I can't remember such repeated threat to use troops happened.

2

We voted for politicians of course. We have to.

3

Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Pakistan or Syria next? Or maybe something more ambitious?

Strikes - troops may be used in airports

possibly, we shall see what happens on wednesday, though given the number of people who will be arriving and leaving and the lack of staff because they are on strike then the government don't really have much of an alternative

Olympics 2012 - plans to use troops

that seems very reasonable.

there will be a need for intense security during the games and i doubt that the police could muster the resources without sacrificing the day to day policing of the rest of London and quite a big chunk of the rest of the country

Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Pakistan or Syria next? Or maybe something more ambitious?

you may have a point about Iraq, but Afgahanistan was unfortunatly necessary in order to disrupt Al Qaeda.

libya was hardly a war and it was sanctioned by pretty much most of the rest of the world.

pakistan seems an unlikely target, given how the syrian government is treating its people then possibly but there seems to be no international pressure for a conflict so that too seems unlikely.

possibly, we shall see what happens on wednesday, though given the number of people who will be arriving and leaving and the lack of staff because they are on strike then the government don't really have much of an alternative

 

 

that seems very reasonable.

 

there will be a need for intense security during the games and i doubt that the police could muster the resources without sacrificing the day to day policing of the rest of London and quite a big chunk of the rest of the country

 

 

 

you may have a point about Iraq, but Afgahanistan was unfortunatly necessary in order to disrupt Al Qaeda.

 

libya was hardly a war and it was sanctioned by pretty much most of the rest of the world.

 

pakistan seems an unlikely target, given how the syrian government is treating its people then possibly but there seems to be no international pressure for a conflict so that too seems unlikely.

The government does have an alternative. It can simply close airports if they aren't going to be safe.

IMO it is never ever reasonable to use troops when the job can be done by police or civilians. And troops certainly should never be used as strike breakers except in genuine emergency situations (e.g. firemen on strike)

We shall see about the wars Andy. More wars are coming. That is for sure.

The government does have an alternative. It can simply close airports if they aren't going to be safe.

possibly, but that would cause chaos which would take days to sort out.

We shall see about the wars Andy. More wars are coming. That is for sure.

well yes, but that's been true for at least the last 3 thousand years