What does victory look like on Wall Street?

[FreeJoe]

Let's assume that the protests get larger, the increasing brutality draws more media attention, and the masses start to side witht he protesters. What does victory look like? What changes get made as a result of this protest if it is successful? What does Wall Street or the Banksters do to capitulate?

[hedgehog]

1. Pass the Jobs Bill?

[HappyMe]

9. I didn't think the Jobs Bill had anything to do with the

protest. :shrug:

[bemildred]

2. Mario Savio:

"There comes a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart, that you can't take part, you can't even passively take part, and you've got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels, upon all the apparatus, and you've got to make it stop. And you've got to indicate to the people who run it, the people who own it, that unless you're free the machine will be prevented from working at all."

That's what the Wall Street protests are about.

[Chan790]

18. but that's not an objective goal.

Protest is by-necessity "carrot-or-stick"...Savio is just "-or-stick".

If Savio's premise is the goal...you've ultimately lost...one cannot achieve to permanently halt the machine. Even if you did permanently kill this machine, by failing to have an objective for its' improvement you've conceded to the fact it'll be replaced by a new machine beyond your input. It's all machines all the way down.

[bemildred]

23. You seem to be confused about what he means.

But I'm OK with that, so go ahead and worry about it.

[Chan790]

25. Not at all, actually.

His premise is ridiculous. He accounts nor offers any end result, positioning only an impossible course of action. Great, we throw ourselves on the machine to grind it to a halt...then what?!

It's impossible to think that no new machine will replace that machine. It's the absurdity that G.K. Chesterton called "Beat the Prophet!" in The Battle of Notting Hill at the outset of the previous century...one cannot reasonably expect or predict that progress will not occur. When one fails to plan a progressive next step...one loses automatically. You cannot really be suggesting that if we can only kill this machine, whatever follows it must be better by default. Are you really?

It's like the Charge of the Light Brigade of moral justifications for activism. It materially does more damage to its own cause and any that cites it, than whatever good it hopes to achieve.

It's the sort of idiocy that one expects to hear within one's ranks from agents provocateurs. Everything for today! If that's really the mindset and objectives of Occupy Wall St. then I'm forced to hope they fail because success will do more damage to the cause of ending the abominable behaviors of Wall St. and returning power to the people.

Sincerely,

A thoughtful post-capitalist.

[bemildred]

30. It doesn't pay to be too literal minded.

But enjoy your argument, I did.

[DaveJ]

3. WS should start using 'human benchmarks' for success

A success is not laying off thousands or outsourcing jobs just because it means shareholders making greater dividends. Success should be based on human effects.

More jobs equals success. More home sales equals success. A better quality of life equals success. The problem with WS now is that it is just the opposite. The more people suffer the better the top tier does. Inequality equals success according the system now. This has to change. They need to show the people that they are working to make this happen.

[Enthusiast]

4. When Wall Street

understands that there must be self imposed limitations on greed.

[truthwillout777]

5. when those greedy bastards apologise for ruining millions of people's lives

and willingly take a new imposed tax on banking and wall street transactions. A tiny tax on transactions will add up to a lot toward paying down the debt.

I want the big banks to apologise for stealing people's homes, willingly give back all homes foreclosed on in the last 5 years, and put their future profits into fixing up homes for low income housing for disabled homeless.

I want the wall street profits on short sale stocks, capital gains tax to be taxed HIGHER than personal income tax...HIGHER....like 90%. They took it for doing nothing. They are responsible for tanking the market continually for their own benefit...we need to take most of that back so they will stop. Currently the only incentive is getting rich at the expense of everyone else, who cares!

[customerserviceguy]

12. Not gonna happen

They cannot "give back" homes that have been sold to innocent third-party purchasers for value. Besides, many (if not most) of the homes foreclosed on in the last few years simply can no longer be afforded by the former borrowers, who have moved on. What are you left with then, an apology?

You're dreaming if you think that the banksters and Wall Streeters are going to demand that the Repukes they own will call for higher taxes.

[tama]

6. Cease to exist

Stockmarket, big banks, corporate personhood, federal reserve and the whole fractional banking system. People organizing into convention to draft a new constitution, if they so choose.

May take a while...

Or what ever, the movement itself is allready a victory.

[swilton]

32. I agree with ending corporate personhood for starters

Breaking up Goldman Sachs should be second on the list - my hopes:

1. There are some operational goals
2. There is a tie-in with October 6 - which has been organizing for a longer period of time and should have a list of tangible objectives.

[RaleighNCDUer]

7. prosecuting the people who crashed the economy for their own short-term gain. nt

[FirstLight]

8. all of the above!

The system is what is broken...a victory could look like out & out rebellion ...depends on how we all participate. What if the protests get so big that the market actually starts to have issues? what happens when they try to stop the protests by jacking food prices and starving us out? will it get that bad before congress steps in or someone calls the national guard? what could congress do to appease us? re-instate some of the laws they anihilated? would it be enough?
how about complete debt forgiveness?

this is happening at a crucial time...because of the shit happening globally and the euro and dollar being so weak...you know if this gets big enough it may just be enough to unravel the fabric of the nets they have us under...

[banned from Kos]

10. Passage of a financial reform bill like Dodd-Frank.

Wait....

The Dems did that in 2010 (with a vote from Scott Brown).

[customerserviceguy]

11. That's what I keep wondering

If the Obama Administration and the Justice Department would hand down indictments of banksters, and at least stage a few perp walks for the protesters, that could be described as victory. But it's just not going to happen this close to the election.

All it does is demoralize our side (when we see "our" side doing zip), and piss off people in the middle who are unable to get to their jobs, who were not part of the scandal. The biggies always get to use the secret parking garage, or the helicopter entrance on the roof.

[marions ghost]

15. Demoralize?

Nah. Energize is more like it.

People will get to their jobs :eyes:

[customerserviceguy]

22. Don't know how old you are

but when we had anti-Vietnam war protests in the street, it was damned demoralizing to see the reaction of Johnson and Humphrey to them. We all saw how that turned out, even with Wallace bleeding off the worst of the racists, Nixon still won.

[marions ghost]

24. I don't see it playing out the same way as before

because everyone knows the history and the pitfalls--and obviously despite that large numbers of people are believing in the value of peaceful protest. (Wisconsin...)

Those Vietnam war times--politically--weren't worse than what we are seeing now. The protestors today are just as justified IMO & as long as they can keep it civil and not be forced into violence by police provocation, they will have sympathy and support from around the country & world. I have been very impressed with how they have been conducting it so far. It's inspiring.

The idea that this will make people rush to vote Rethuglican--sorry, not buying that at all. After Junior, people just aren't quite that gullible (not to mention the pathetic lineup of candidates...).
They could steal it, but I'm assuming you don't mean that, since you put out the argument.

Look at it with fresh eyes if you can...

[customerserviceguy]

38. You still haven't answered my question about your age

But your statement about Vietnam not being any worse than today gives me a clue.

Nixon rode to victory on the slogan, "Law and Order", which before it was the catchy name of a series of TV shows, was a code phrase to the mushy middle to get rid of the demonstrations that involved both Vietnam and the civil rights riots of the late 1960's. As the baby boom generation gets older, and protesting doesn't sound as fun as it used to be, there will be comforting words that Repuke candidates find today to play upon the same fears that Richard Nixon was able to harness.

You say that people aren't all that gullible, well after the disgrace of Nixon and Ford, they were only too ready to turn to Reagan after four years of Jimmy Carter. Already I hear the drumbeat that Barack Obama is Jimmy Carter's second term, and I don't see the President doing much to counter that impression.

[marions ghost]

42. I was in college in the 70's & 80's

so I missed the participatory part of it all, but I certainly grew up in the aftermath of Vietnam. And the Reagan years were horrible enough. I understand how the shock of the 60's led people to elect a mediocre actor who promised to turn back the clock (esp after the huge shame and embarrassment of Nixon). I believe that they (the Kochs, the Aspens, the Neocons) won't stop until they erase everything good and promising and democratic about this country. They want it all--they want one-party corporate control and they are very close to realizing that dream. What they don't understand is that it will collapse in the end. It is not sustainable. They're stupid that way. It's an old story of domination and control, but played out now in a very complex terrain.

We have to be unafraid of "what they say"--what fears repuke candidates play on now. It really doesn't matter. Barack will win unless they steal it. What that means for us liberals I don't know, but Barack has pleased the Republican Corporates (are there any Dem corporates?--not many)--enough that he will win re-election. This is all a big smokescreen and a way to affect state politics, which is really what they care about.

[FarLeftFist]

13. A complete overhaul of the financial system, a reformed tax code, and people over profits

[DirkGently]

14. At this stage, they're simply raising consciousness of where the problem lies.

That's enough to begin.

Corruption on the scale of the Wall Street / Washington connection relies on the acquiesence of those in harm's way. A pretense that nothing is going on, and that there is no "issue" to discuss. Nothing can happen until that pretense is stripped away.

Washington is well aware of the people who believe abortion is a problem. The people who believe immigrants are a problem. The people who believe "government is the problem," (just when a Democrat is in the White House, of course).

In fact, a great many people are aware that the economic crash and the cascading disasters we're seeing as a result of both the bailout and the institutional resistance to changing anything to prevent it from happening again. A great many people are angry about that. A great many people will support those leaders willing to do something about it, and not those who aren't.

Think of it as a kind of conversational ice breaker. Clearing one's throat softly doesn't get much attention these days.

[marions ghost]

19. Exactly

Peaceful protest is a form of witnessing--pointing the finger, calling out, public shaming. We have very little other recourse against these criminals at this point. If we must go down, then we must go down as conscientious objectors.

As Chris Hedges said, "anyone who thinks these enormous grievances are going to be addressed through merely voting is delusional."

The system is totally corrupt.

[DirkGently]

34. I think Hedges is right. No vote, no single leader, will be enough.

[marions ghost]

36. After what we've seen the last few years

it's obvious to me it would take a (nonviolent) movement that dares to go beyond the shoring up of the status quo.

:fistbump:

[Broderick]

16. When Wall Street is a smoldering remnant

and it was all a figment of our imagination. That is what victory looks like.

[Avalux]

17. Awareness that the current system is broken and corps have too much power.

Union-breaking, foreclosed homes, unemployment, lack of medical care, college grads living at home feeling helpless about their futures.....all of this adds up.

Consider the protests as a counterbalance to the constant media brainwashing we endure in the news and in commercials, telling us everything's fine.

With awareness, more people will join in; eventually it can't be ignored.

Baby steps for now.

[Bragi]

20. They need to give back proceeds of past crimes

The Wall Street honcho board should petition the White House to make illegal the enormous skim payments they have conspiratorially given to each another for decades as payment for routine processing of financial instruments.

They also need to ask the President to bring forward a special tax to impound the proceeds of their past thievery.

And finally, they need to ask the Obama administration to reform the U.S financial and banking system.

After that, the protest could stand down for the moment.

[lunatica]

21. As opposed to what? Defeat? We already know what that looks like

I think victory looks like a movement that takes off and actually puts pressure on politicians and the corporations.

The anti-war movement in the 1960s looked just as weak. Yet it worked.

The civil rights movement was sure to fail said the white men. It didn't did it?

The feminist movement was the laughing stock of the world, but it succeeded.

Everyone was sure the LGBT community would never get equality in the military yet here we are staring it right in the face.

Have you ever been in any of these groups when they started their movement?

[Chan790]

27. They had an objective goal.

This one doesn't. You can't get two people in that park to agree on why they're there. Fuck. You can't get two people in that park to agree on what the cause is.

Those movements squelched static in their movements to keep people on-topic and their objectives clear and strong. If you were participating in the anti-war actions, you were there for anti-war, not because you opposed capital punishment or segregation. You could be all but the movements were initially separate. The connecting narratives came later to unify the left and tie anti-war to civil rights to sexual-equality to...

[lunatica]

35. It seems your objective goal is to tear any movement down

Because you think you know how movements should be. You obviously didn't live in the 60s. It was as chaotic as this one is. People didn't have a meeting and decide, "Our objective goal is to be anti-war."

So maybe you should consider getting out of the way because you're helping the other side.

[Chan790]

37. You know what, lunatica...

yeah, being born at the tail-end of the 1970s, it's an unlikely bet that I'd have been involved in protests in the 1960s. I'd argue you're the one helping the other side by insisting on keeping our side disorganized and not-on-point as long as possible. Just because it's how you perceive things as having started in the 1960s (factually, it did not), does not mean that it's the best course of action...or did you think you were perfect and didn't make mistakes?

But, hell...what do I know? Trained to coordinate political action in the best programs we've got, doing it on a consistent basis for almost 20 years, professional training in related subjects like PR & Social Media (also unrelated but NPO management), experience as a journalist, run one of the best training programs available for preparing people for the inevitability of arrest and their rights. I'm the professional, I spend most of my time wrangling hornets. Oh they're pissed off and they want to go every which way and swarm but success will only come from imposing direction and order to the chaos. That's all I'm arguing for: a bit of direction and objective achievable goals that everybody on the ground knows. If you look down thread...I praised the poster who came in and laid down exactly that, clear objective goals of the protest. That's the person you'd better hope is the one that gets interviewed on CNN should they ever show up.

You've taken over lower Manhattan, you've the attention of the nation, microphone's in your face...CNN reporter asks you: "Who are you? Why are you here?" (Pretty straightforward, right? Wrong!) The question is a proxy for another compound question they don't know to ask. "You've got our attention. What do you want? What is it going to take for you to go home, take every one of these people with you and claim victory? **Why should America care?**"

Don't have an answer? A clear coherent one you can articulate in 5 seconds or less so it makes a great sound bite? One you've ideally practiced in the mirror so you don't panic in this moment? Congratulations, you lose...you've just set back your cause. (I'm well aware you're not going to flub that moment. How many of those nineteen year old kids, not politically conscious until sometime in the last month can you say that about? By the way, unless you want to be labelled "spokesperson" and be the person that LEOs are told to look for and arrest, don't give your full name.) Also, not going home....fighting for more. Once you have attention, you have a short window to make "demands".

What has sank every effective attempt at liberal political action since the 1960s is the durable lie that organization, coordination and professionalism (OCP) in advocacy management are not important...that change comes from groundswell. OCP drives groundswell. (OCP drove groundswell in the 1960s too.) Effective protest is not disorganized and oddly it's run like any other effective venture: in a professional manner by people prepared for their role, prepared to prepare others according to need in-situ. That's what's missing from Occupy Wall St. right this minute...someone should have set up rolling "activist boot camp" sessions and trained these kids on the basics. What to say if they were interviewed, what to say if they were arrested (Name, hometown, SSN. Do not resist!), carry milk (it neutralizes pepper spray. It doesn't matter if it's sour and room temp...you're not drinking it. You do want to rinse ASAP though afterwards.), carry water, carry first aid, don't make eye-contact with law-enforcement, basic evasion and escape, save empty bottles (they're useful!) and a hundred other points. Takes an hour at most, helps everyone, gets results immediately.

The people marching in the streets change little by themselves...they're effective to catch the attention of the public. The heavy lifting comes first to provide an answer to the problems once you have that attention. Yes, you prepare to answer the question before you march in the streets. I'm hardly arguing for anything more than insisting that the people on the ground, should they manage to finally get some media attention, all of them are able to explain what the protest is about and what they hope to achieve. That's the purpose, is it not? To gain the attention of the public and increase groundswell towards change?

[Admiral Loinpresser]

26. Here are my suggestions:

1)too big to fail equals too big to exist-- The rationale for surrendering hundreds of billions in aid to Wall Street was that not to do so would have resulted in incredible shock waves to the world economy. I don't believe the DOJ or Congress has done anything significant in anti-trust actions or otherwise to reduce the size and power of these extortionists. The people should demand that Wall Street participate in a re-structuring program so that no individual company is too big to fail. This could result in more competition and more choice and freedom for consumers and potentially avert further extortion;

2) robust regulation of derivatives and other speculative financial instruments which led to the collapse-- Once again, I don't believe the DOJ or Congress has taken significant action. The people should demand that Wall Street participate in a voluntary compliance regime, monitored by economists, on financial instrument regulation;

3) Re-negotiation and relief for distressed mortgage holders;

4) Voluntary compliance with Glass-Steagall until its re-enactment by Congress; and

5) An apology to the American people for the Wall Street actions leading to the putative need for the bailout.

These remedies could be formalized in a settlement agreement which would include an arbitration clause for alleged violations of the agreement by signatory corporations.

Of course, the big boys will not agree to such conditions or any proposal which addresses the corruption and mismanagement. Why should they? They're winning. That is why we need to occupy Wall Street.

Caveat: I did no research in posting this, so if anyone has contrary information on DOJ or Congress regarding points 1 and 2, I would love to be pleasantly surprised.

[Chan790]

28. See that's an objective goal.

A series or list of concrete actions. It's something to work towards, it's clear and it's achievable. Bravo! That's more than most have given today.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

29. There are many other worthy goals.

But I think OWS should have goals which are easily linked to the bailout of 2009. That is the strategic key in my view. When the occupation in DC begins in October, a broader list of goals is appropriate:

1) federal stimulus bill for clean energy jobs;

2) federal funding of elections;

3) US out of Afghanistan, Iraq, etc.

[girl gone mad]

31. Breaking up the TBTF banks, clawing back those taxpayer funded bonuses..

implementing a Tobin tax, eliminating corporate personhood..

Any of these to start.

[Jack Rabbit]

33. Blankfein and Dimon (among others) being led away in cuffs

!!

[mod mom]

43. that's a start, followed by many of their corrupt cronies.

Assets confiscated and turned over to the people they defrauded.

[Matariki]

39. Scrapping that fucking outrageous Citizen's United ruling.

Real election reform. Real financial reform. Real justice punishing misdeeds by banks, mortgage lenders, hedge fund managers, etc, etc.

And a rebalance of wealth distribution so that 1% doesn't own 80% of everything. Hopefully via peaceful measures.

[itsallhappening]

40. Victory would be about two weeks of steady 100+ point daily gains.

[white_wolf]

41. Since the protests are about Wall Street I propose the following:

1. Imprisonment of those responsible for the financial crash. 2. Nationalization of the banking industry without compensation if possible. If we must compensate them, then we give them government bonds redeemable in 100 years time by the original recipient only.

[piratefish08]

44. they're raising awareness - and since we already know what losing looks like, that's a great start!

[moondust]

45. Election reform would help.

To include:

1. Big money OUT of politics.
2. No more voting by machine vs. paper trail and some kind of random third-party machine spot inspection regime along the lines of nuclear weapons verification. See: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=5008468&mesg_id=5008468