Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Occupy Galway Group (mod note added)
Options
Comments
-
ben.schlomo wrote: »
Not much point name calling or making derogatory comments towards the 99% you claim to represent is there? Hardly a good promotion tool.look just because a chunk of country is suffering from accute stockholm syndrome/were busy/feel helpless it doest take from the "60/70" (it was more like 100+ to be fair) people that are willing to protest!!
Anyway im not getting back into it with ye as ye never answer anything thats asked or challenged, all ye do is come back and put up your propaganda BS and then whine and use offensive language when challenged. Pointless trying to converse with ye.
where did i make an insulting or derogatory comment in that post??
1. stockholm syndrome ;
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome
In psychology, Stockholm Syndrome is an apparently paradoxical psychological phenomenon in which hostages express empathy and have positive feelings towards their captors, sometimes to the point of defending them. These feelings are generally considered irrational in light of the danger or risk endured by the victims, who essentially mistake a lack of abuse from their captors for an act of kindness.[1][2] The FBI’s Hostage Barricade Database System shows that roughly 27% of victims show evidence of Stockholm Syndrome.[3] The Syndrome is named after the Norrmalmstorg robbery of Kreditbanken at Norrmalmstorg in Stockholm, in which bank employees were held hostage from August 23 to August 28, 1973. In this case, victims became emotionally attached to their captors, and even defended them after they were freed from their six-day ordeal. The term "Stockholm Syndrome" was coined by the criminologist and psychiatrist Nils Bejerot, who assisted the police during the robbery, and referred to the Syndrome in a news broadcast.[4] It was originally defined by psychiatrist Frank Ochberg to aid the management of hostage situations.[5]
HideEvolutionary explanations
The Syndrome has also been explained in evolutionary terms by a phenomenon sometimes referred to as "Capture-bonding".
In the view of evolutionary psychology "the mind is a set of information-processing machines that were designed by natural selection to solve adaptive problems faced by our hunter-gatherer ancestors." [6]
One of the "adaptive problems faced by our hunter-gatherer ancestors," particularly our female ancestors, was being abducted by another band. Life in the human "environment of evolutionary adaptiveness" (EEA) is thought by researchers such as Azar Gat to be similar to that of the few remaining hunter-gatherer societies. "Deadly violence is also regularly activated in competition over women. . . . Abduction of women, rape, . . . are widespread direct causes of reproductive conflict . . ." [7] I.e., being captured [8] and having their dependent children killed might have been fairly common.[9] Women who resisted capture in such situations risked being killed.[10]
Azar Gat argues that war and abductions (capture) were typical of human pre-history.[11] When selection is intense and persistent, adaptive traits (such as capture-bonding) become universal to the population or species. (See Selection.)
Partial activation of the capture-bonding psychological trait may lie behind battered-wife syndrome, military basic training, fraternity hazing, and sex practices such as sadism/masochism or bondage/discipline.[12][13][14][15]
2. were busy ;
even im too busy sometimes to attend a particular protest
3. Feeling helpless ;
http://www.alternet.org/economy/117762/economic_ptsd%3A_the_psychological_effects_of_the_recession/
Having recently lost 40 percent of my own retirement savings, it's not hard to empathize with others in the same boat, including their feelings of helplessness, rage, guilt and shame.
Empathy for oneself and others is necessary but not sufficient. The antidote to helplessness begins with compassion and acceptance, but it doesn't end there. It involves grief but can't rest there. We need psychological healing but not apart from healing the world.
Outrage is part of the healing that we need. But our public outrage at being betrayed by the greed, mismanagement and political shenanigans that created the current crisis is compromised by all the subtle and secret ways that we avoid confronting painful feelings of helplessness and, instead, irrationally hold ourselves accountable.
This creates a political problem: While the helplessness we feel is legitimate, our ability to rationally respond to it by trying to correct its real structural causes is compromised by the guilt and shame that we've internalized.
Our real responsibility to change the world -- something we can do -- is undermined by the false and self-blaming feelings of responsibility for things that we didn't and can't do. The paradox is that we have to face the ways that we're really helpless in order to own the ways that we're not.
What is the alternative? The alternative to irrational guilt is real innocence. The alternative to denial is grief. And the solution to helplessness is to get angry and fight back.
The problem for progressives is psychological as well as practical. Like everyone else, we struggle with passivity, cynicism and confusion about how to effect change in the current climate.
Some of us are waiting on the sidelines to see what Obama will do, criticizing or celebrating his choice of advisers. Others are actively organizing and participating in various efforts to influence political outcomes. But most of us, I believe, are facing the difficulty of maintaining and building on the hope and passion generated over the last year in the presidential campaign.
In my view, our capacity and energy for political engagement is sapped by hidden psychological reactions to the current economic catastrophe, reactions complicated by feelings of guilt, responsibility and helplessness.
We feel responsible for things we didn't do and helpless in the face of things we could do. We feel guilty when we should feel innocent, cynical when we should feel hopeful and powerless when we should feel powerful. Understanding and resolving this confusion should help progressives enormously.
Everyone processes economic stress and anxiety differently. For every rational response to this recession, there is an irrational one -- one that derives less from objective circumstances and more from the peculiarities of the human psyche. Such peculiarities are no less unreasonable because they are common. Irrational feelings of envy, self-blame and denial rear their ugly heads in many of us, often with painful results. I see them in myself. I see them in friends. And I see them in my clients.
Self-blame is one of the most insidious and common of these reactions. It's not that we blame ourselves for failing to anticipate the exact moment when the stock market began to collapse, although some do. Most of us are too rational to openly fault ourselves for not being that omniscient.
Instead, the self-blaming is subtler and starts a little later in the time-line, e.g., I should have moved everything to cash when it first happened, or I was in denial and now I'm paying for it, or So-and-So predicted that the bottom was falling out, and I just didn't listen.
Sometimes, such guilt is spiced up with a dash of envy: My neighbor just sold his house and was sitting on the profits waiting to buy another one -- the lucky bastard. Or, my brother-in-law saw this coming and moved to the sidelines a year ago, or even, from one patient, my best friend consulted a psychic last spring who convinced her to get completely out of the stock market!
Such stories, real and apocryphal, invariably provoke twinges of envy and self-criticism. Their good fortune highlights our failure. Often, such self-castigation continues right up to the present: I should probably get out now, but am afraid I'll miss the recovery. The implied judgment here is "fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me." Whatever the facts of the matter (even the savviest of investors are not sure what to do at the moment), the underlying sentiment involves blaming oneself for some mistake, failure of nerve, intelligence or judgment.
In fact, while individuals here and there may have outguessed the markets, most of us didn't. And when "most of us" find ourselves in a similar predicament, that predicament can't possibly be an individual problem or be reasonably solved by individuals making smarter or more rational decisions.
When the dot-com bubble burst in the spring of 2000, many of my patients blamed themselves for being too greedy, or for going against their common sense by listening too much to their brokers, or for going along with the herd even though they knew better.
The fact that millions of people were saying the exact same thing didn't mitigate the painful feelings of responsibility and guilt that they had then, and such facts don't seem to alter similar feelings today. People feel a deep need, almost a compulsion, to take on individual responsibility for their lot in life, despite oceans of evidence that they're victims of forces they cannot individually control. And every story of someone who beat the odds, bet against the market, or escaped unscathed just serves to reinforce this self-blaming tendency.
If there's one thing I've learned from my work over 30 years with people who have been hurt or traumatized, it's this: Human beings can't tolerate helplessness. When we're helpless, we feel an unconscious need to spin a story about it, a story in which we somehow had choices or one in which our suffering had some transcendent meaning.
One of my patients lost everything in the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. Even though she had retrofitted her house in exactly the same casual way as her neighbors, she criticized herself for not hiring a top-flight structural engineer to insure that the retrofit was state-of-the-art.
Another patient dealt with feelings of loss about finally leaving her abusive boyfriend of seven years by feeling guilty that she hadn't given him enough "chances." Abused children routinely blame themselves for their parents' neglect and violence. In each of these cases, we see someone who can't feel cleanly and simply victimized, who can't feel helpless and who certainly cannot feel innocent.
Innocence and helplessness are intertwined in our psyches. After all, if we're truly helpless, we should feel innocent and not guilty. If we can't really control a situation, then we can't be responsible for its outcome. But since our psyches can't tolerate facing helplessness, then we will also have a problem feeling innocent. For example, when people are given a chance to talk at length about financial losses over which they had no control, there is usually more than a trace of guilt.
Recently, I've had the opportunity to listen to people who were swindled by Bernard Madoff blame themselves for having trusted him. Their outrage and despair is contaminated by an irrational guilt, irrational because while they might have been legally responsible for their investment, it was obviously not a "choice" in the sense for which they blame themselves. Madoff had impeccable credentials and came highly recommended by all the "experts."
It would be like women in the 1950s blaming themselves for babies born with birth defects because they took the Thalidomide prescribed by their doctors for morning sickness. Choice, responsibility and guilt would hardly be reasonable considerations here, and yet, we all know that this is exactly what many of these women felt then, and it's what victimized shareholders privately feel now. We have a difficult time feeling innocent and helpless.
Why is this? Well, we certainly have a culture that idealizes individual responsibility, that idealizes the "self-made man" who succeeds despite all obstacles. Despite abundant evidence demonstrating the near-impossibility of overcoming the combined constraints of social class, education, early child-rearing, cultural norms and even chance, it's almost impossible to shake off the notion that we live in a meritocracy that rewards the worthy. Because some people overcome the odds, just like some people anticipated this recession, there can be no innocent victims here. Since everybody in the same situation doesn't fail, then failure has to be an individual matter.
Or perhaps there is something quintessentially human about free choice -- namely, that even in the harshest and most constrained of environments, we are compelled to believe we're free, that we have choices, that, we believe, with philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre, that "freedom is what you do with what's been done to you." Perhaps I can't control my external environment, but I can control how I feel about it.
Thus, despite being objectively helpless, whether in the face of a stock market crash or an economic recession, a natural disaster or the gross injustice of other people, we will always believe that there's something we could have done about it then or can do about it now, and blame ourselves if such reactions are absent.
A deeper and, in my view, more important source of the difficulty most people have feeling helpless and innocent lies in the psychology of childhood. The psychoanalyst W.R.D. Fairbairn once said, "Children would rather be sinners in heaven than saints in hell." What he meant was that children would prefer to believe that they come from a just and good family in which they were bad than an unjust or bad family in which they were good.
For this reason, abused children often report that they provoked their parents' violence, and adults often qualify accounts of their own early beatings with the caveat that they were "difficult" children.
Most people can't let themselves feel innocent, because in a truly moral universe their caregivers would then have to be guilty, and that recognition is intolerable. It would mean that they, as children, were not protected, that the attachment necessary to their psychological survival was absent, disturbed or even dangerous, and that the beings upon whom they helplessly depended might, at times, have meant harm.
Children can rarely face this emotional reality, and neither can most adults. It is not even necessary that these perceptions be objectively true -- it is the subjective experience of parental failures that is so frightening, it leads to self-blaming.
I think that the residue of this childhood denial can be found in the last-ditch psychic efforts of many of the people I know and treat to continue to believe in the goodness of our political and financial institutions. Our public outrage at being betrayed by the greed, mismanagement and political shenanigans that created the current crisis is compromised by all the subtle and secret ways that we irrationally hold ourselves accountable.
This creates a political problem: While the helplessness we feel is legitimate, our ability to rationally respond to it by trying to correct its real structural causes is compromised by the guilt and shame that we've internalized. Our real responsibility to change the world -- something we can do -- is undermined by our false and self-blaming feelings of responsibility for things that we didn't and can't do.
To say the obvious: We're not children objectively helpless in the face of overwhelming parental authority. The system has been rigged against us, but it doesn't have to be. Our culpability is not in having trusted this system, but in not seeing that -- unlike children in a family -- we currently have the freedom to change it. The paradox is that we have to face the ways that we're really helpless in order to own the ways that we're not.
The argument that most of us irrationally resist feeling helpless and innocent may seem spurious given how often we hear parents, teachers, pundits and politicians extol the importance of personal responsibility. And isn't it true that too many, not too few, people seem to blame others constantly for their own problems? How can I argue that people suffer from an inability to feel helpless and innocent rather than an inability to take responsibility?
Here's why: Public displays of innocence are almost always defenses against private feelings of self-blame. In both my personal and clinical experience, the louder someone proclaims his or her victimization, the more guilty that person is liable to feel underneath. The reason is simple: guilt and self-blame are too painful for most people to consciously tolerate for too long. They're compelled to externalize it, vainly trying to convince themselves and others that they're innocent victims and that everyone else is to blame for their predicament.
Such folks -- and there are many -- appear to wrap themselves in the flag of helpless and blameless innocence. Secretly, however, they feel guilty. This system isn't stable because it rests on a foundation of guilt and its denial, and thus the cycle of blame and guilt goes on endlessly.
Most of us are, in fact, helpless and innocent victims of the breakdown of an economic system rigged to benefit the rich. However much we might have, at times, followed our worst instincts when it came to spending, debt and investments, we are not to blame for our current predicament.
We need to develop compassion for ourselves and each other. We need to mourn the loss of our money and the financial dreams that they fueled. This is not to say that we won't recover some of our losses or shouldn't have dreams, but we can't turn back the clock and pretend that this catastrophe hasn't happened.
Thus, like mourning the death of a loved one, we have to come to terms with a new reality in a way that allows us to experience a range of normal reactions, reactions we can openly share with others rather than hide in the closet as if they were private failures and sources of shame. I have too many patients and friends who are ashamed of talking about their financial losses for fear of being judged. Shame makes loss and trauma indigestible.
And, finally, we have to get angry, get organized and empower ourselves to change a system over which we have had too little control. It is -- and should be -- infuriating that economic elites, along with their political enablers, have gamed the system such that they've reaped astronomical benefits while exposing the rest of us to the toxic byproducts of their greed and indifference.
Michael Bader is a psychologist and psychoanalyst in San Francisco. He is the author of "Arousal: The Secret Logic of Sexual Fantasies" and "Male Sexuality: Why Women Don't Understand It -- and Men Don't Either." He has written extensively about psychology and politics.0 -
Great reply :rolleyes:, scatter gun approach i see, throw as much crap as possible and see if it sticks. Certainly wont with the majority of people.where did i make an insulting or derogatory comment in that post??
1. stockholm syndrome ;
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome
In psychology, Stockholm Syndrome is an apparently paradoxical psychological phenomenon in which hostages express empathy and have positive feelings towards their captors, sometimes to the point of defending them. These feelings are generally considered irrational in light of the danger or risk endured by the victims, who essentially mistake a lack of abuse from their captors for an act of kindness.[1][2] The FBI’s Hostage Barricade Database System shows that roughly 27% of victims show evidence of Stockholm Syndrome.[3] The Syndrome is named after the Norrmalmstorg robbery of Kreditbanken at Norrmalmstorg in Stockholm, in which bank employees were held hostage from August 23 to August 28, 1973. In this case, victims became emotionally attached to their captors, and even defended them after they were freed from their six-day ordeal. The term "Stockholm Syndrome" was coined by the criminologist and psychiatrist Nils Bejerot, who assisted the police during the robbery, and referred to the Syndrome in a news broadcast.[4] It was originally defined by psychiatrist Frank Ochberg to aid the management of hostage situations.[5]
HideEvolutionary explanations
The Syndrome has also been explained in evolutionary terms by a phenomenon sometimes referred to as "Capture-bonding".
In the view of evolutionary psychology "the mind is a set of information-processing machines that were designed by natural selection to solve adaptive problems faced by our hunter-gatherer ancestors." [6]
One of the "adaptive problems faced by our hunter-gatherer ancestors," particularly our female ancestors, was being abducted by another band. Life in the human "environment of evolutionary adaptiveness" (EEA) is thought by researchers such as Azar Gat to be similar to that of the few remaining hunter-gatherer societies. "Deadly violence is also regularly activated in competition over women. . . . Abduction of women, rape, . . . are widespread direct causes of reproductive conflict . . ." [7] I.e., being captured [8] and having their dependent children killed might have been fairly common.[9] Women who resisted capture in such situations risked being killed.[10]
Azar Gat argues that war and abductions (capture) were typical of human pre-history.[11] When selection is intense and persistent, adaptive traits (such as capture-bonding) become universal to the population or species. (See Selection.)
Partial activation of the capture-bonding psychological trait may lie behind battered-wife syndrome, military basic training, fraternity hazing, and sex practices such as sadism/masochism or bondage/discipline.[12][13][14][15]
2. were busy ;
3. Feeling helpless ;
http://www.alternet.org/economy/117762/economic_ptsd%3A_the_psychological_effects_of_the_recession/
AlterNet / By Michael Bader COMMENT NOW!
Economic PTSD: The Psychological Effects of the Recession
We feel responsible for things we didn't do and helpless in the face of things we couldn't do.
January 14, 2009 |
LIKE THIS ARTICLE ?
Join our mailing list:
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Economy headlines via email.
Having recently lost 40 percent of my own retirement savings, it's not hard to empathize with others in the same boat, including their feelings of helplessness, rage, guilt and shame.
Empathy for oneself and others is necessary but not sufficient. The antidote to helplessness begins with compassion and acceptance, but it doesn't end there. It involves grief but can't rest there. We need psychological healing but not apart from healing the world.
Outrage is part of the healing that we need. But our public outrage at being betrayed by the greed, mismanagement and political shenanigans that created the current crisis is compromised by all the subtle and secret ways that we avoid confronting painful feelings of helplessness and, instead, irrationally hold ourselves accountable.
This creates a political problem: While the helplessness we feel is legitimate, our ability to rationally respond to it by trying to correct its real structural causes is compromised by the guilt and shame that we've internalized.
Our real responsibility to change the world -- something we can do -- is undermined by the false and self-blaming feelings of responsibility for things that we didn't and can't do. The paradox is that we have to face the ways that we're really helpless in order to own the ways that we're not.
What is the alternative? The alternative to irrational guilt is real innocence. The alternative to denial is grief. And the solution to helplessness is to get angry and fight back.
The problem for progressives is psychological as well as practical. Like everyone else, we struggle with passivity, cynicism and confusion about how to effect change in the current climate.
Some of us are waiting on the sidelines to see what Obama will do, criticizing or celebrating his choice of advisers. Others are actively organizing and participating in various efforts to influence political outcomes. But most of us, I believe, are facing the difficulty of maintaining and building on the hope and passion generated over the last year in the presidential campaign.
In my view, our capacity and energy for political engagement is sapped by hidden psychological reactions to the current economic catastrophe, reactions complicated by feelings of guilt, responsibility and helplessness.
We feel responsible for things we didn't do and helpless in the face of things we could do. We feel guilty when we should feel innocent, cynical when we should feel hopeful and powerless when we should feel powerful. Understanding and resolving this confusion should help progressives enormously.
Everyone processes economic stress and anxiety differently. For every rational response to this recession, there is an irrational one -- one that derives less from objective circumstances and more from the peculiarities of the human psyche. Such peculiarities are no less unreasonable because they are common. Irrational feelings of envy, self-blame and denial rear their ugly heads in many of us, often with painful results. I see them in myself. I see them in friends. And I see them in my clients.
Self-blame is one of the most insidious and common of these reactions. It's not that we blame ourselves for failing to anticipate the exact moment when the stock market began to collapse, although some do. Most of us are too rational to openly fault ourselves for not being that omniscient.
Instead, the self-blaming is subtler and starts a little later in the time-line, e.g., I should have moved everything to cash when it first happened, or I was in denial and now I'm paying for it, or So-and-So predicted that the bottom was falling out, and I just didn't listen.
Sometimes, such guilt is spiced up with a dash of envy: My neighbor just sold his house and was sitting on the profits waiting to buy another one -- the lucky bastard. Or, my brother-in-law saw this coming and moved to the sidelines a year ago, or even, from one patient, my best friend consulted a psychic last spring who convinced her to get completely out of the stock market!
1234Next page »
View as a single page
0
digg
Share
COMMENT NOW!
AAA
LIKED THIS ARTICLE? JOIN OUR EMAIL LIST
Stay up to date with the latest Economy headlines via email
See more stories tagged with: economy, psychology, depression, recession, financial crisis, shame, guilt
Some Feet Not Meant for Shoes - Novel Excerpt
Is This Land Made for You and Me--or The Super-Rich?
As Occupy Wall Street Has Changed Protest Dynamics, Vibrant Groups Like United Students Against Sweatshops Are Back in the Forefront
Sucker: How Cable Companies Make You Pay For Channels You'll Never Watch
Hot News and Views
Religious Right Endorses Santorum; Aims to Stop Romney in South Carolina
How I Came to Terms With My Boyfriend's Infidelity -- and My Own
Victory for Internet Freedom: Obama Announces Opposition to SOPA, Congress Shelves Bill
Men's Earnings Haven't Just Stagnated Over Past 40 Years--They've Fallen
Katrina vanden Heuvel: Why I Swapped Yoga for Kickboxing This Election Year
BOOKS
Shocker: Is Our World Becoming Less Violent?
SEX & RELATIONSHIPS
Confiscating Condoms? The Dumbfounding Ways Police Deal With Prostitution
8 Awful Pop Culture Offerings to Dread in the New Year
FOOD
How Genetically Modified Foods Could Affect Our Health in Unexpected Ways
ECONOMY
Romney Screams "Pampered Elite": How Toxic Will His 1% Image Be in the Election?
DRUGS
Do You Know Where Your Medicine Came From? Over 40% of Pills Made Overseas -- Many in Unregulated Factories
ECONOMY
Workers Now Have Right to Class-Action Lawsuits Again0 -
@ ben ; if you cared to look now at my reply i have edited it, i do hope you can read through my reply as you did falsely accuse me of something!!0
-
Like i said im not getting into it, you consistently refer to people who dont agree with your views in a negative manner, you get aggitated and use 'language' and report people who contradict your views. Anyone who trawled over your posts would see it. I've commented and quoted many of your posts in a questioning manner, have you replied? No, because ye are a failure of a group with no direction and no strategies. A pointless entity in an eyesore of a camp which ye should now have the good grace to disband. Think this is my final post in this thread as its a mirror of your group, i.e a time wasting exercise.@ ben ; if you cared to look now at my reply i have edited it, i do hope you can read through my reply as you did falsely accuse me of something!!0 -
ben.schlomo wrote: »
Like i said im not getting into it, you consistently refer to people who dont agree with your views in a negative manner, you get aggitated and use 'language' and report people who contradict your views. Anyone who trawled over your posts would see it. I've commented and quoted many of your posts in a questioning manner, have you replied? No, because ye are a failure of a group with no direction and no strategies. A pointless entity in an eyesore of a camp which ye should now have the good grace to disband. Think this is my final post in this thread as its a mirror of your group, i.e a time wasting exercise.@ ben ; if you cared to look now at my reply i have edited it, i do hope you can read through my reply as you did falsely accuse me of something!!
well excuse me for ranting while seeing what we're swallowing as regards politics in this country!
also i was reporting those insisting on quoting false news reports which have since been taken down altogether or edited to remove mentions of chairs being or attempted at being thrown.
i honestly wish you all the best in life and hope we at the occupy camp can prove you wrong sooner rather than later.0 -
Advertisement
-
eire.man, regarding the Dublin and Cork movements occupying NAMA owned buildings, how come there's been no effort by the authorities to kick them out, seeing as they'd be squatting in private property?
Unless they're paying NAMA rent.....:rolleyes:0 -
Don't care if I get banned tbh, but you're an idiot, plain and simple. You ever been to Terryland? Probably not.and the analogy you used above included a bust football club who had Nick Leeson (Barings bank dodgy dealer!!) controlling finances!!
oh the ironing
People see you cursing, abusing posters who don't agree with your absolute joke of a protest and making completely farcical points about the economy, politics etc. and you expect to become the 99%? Christ on a bike. 60-70 people showed up, shows that nobody cares about the lot of you. Drawing dole and sitting in a tent, sure some have it awful easy. I prefer to see Ministers getting over 100K, at least they're trying to fix the economy, rather than sponge from it. It's just amazing to think that you've been there so long, not made any plans, not done one positive thing for Galway (in fact, cause a nuisance until ye eventually moved to beside the fountain when the market was here.) Ye are THE laughing stock of Galway and I honestly don't think that's an understatment. All you do is spout bulls**t on this forum, making redundant points, abusing others. Surprised you havn't been perma-banned. Surprised your camp hasn't been perma-bulldozed either.
You will never, ever become the 99% and for that I'm thankful. You will never gain enough support, ever, and that makes me happy inside. Why? Because it shows the vast vast majority of Irish people to be smart individuals, who are going to follow people with PLANS to save the economy. You have no plans. At all. And you've been there for over 4 months. What the hell have ye been doing for 4 months like? Absolute jokeshop, and the sooner that eyesore is removed from Eyre Square the better. I'm sure some of you protestors own houses, why not set up in a back garden or something? Be just as pointless...0 -
Don't care if I get banned tbh, but you're an idiot, plain and simple. You ever been to Terryland? Probably not.
People see you cursing, abusing posters who don't agree with your absolute joke of a protest and making completely farcical points about the economy, politics etc. and you expect to become the 99%? Christ on a bike. 60-70 people showed up, shows that nobody cares about the lot of you. Drawing dole and sitting in a tent, sure some have it awful easy. I prefer to see Ministers getting over 100K, at least they're trying to fix the economy, rather than sponge from it. It's just amazing to think that you've been there so long, not made any plans, not done one positive thing for Galway (in fact, cause a nuisance until ye eventually moved to beside the fountain when the market was here.) Ye are THE laughing stock of Galway and I honestly don't think that's an understatment. All you do is spout bulls**t on this forum, making redundant points, abusing others. Surprised you havn't been perma-banned. Surprised your camp hasn't been perma-bulldozed either.
You will never, ever become the 99% and for that I'm thankful. You will never gain enough support, ever, and that makes me happy inside. Why? Because it shows the vast vast majority of Irish people to be smart individuals, who are going to follow people with PLANS to save the economy. You have no plans. At all. And you've been there for over 4 months. What the hell have ye been doing for 4 months like? Absolute jokeshop, and the sooner that eyesore is removed from Eyre Square the better. I'm sure some of you protestors own houses, why not set up in a back garden or something? Be just as pointless...
Post of the year.0 -
-
Don't care if I get banned tbh, but you're an idiot, plain and simple. You ever been to Terryland? Probably not.
People see you cursing, abusing posters who don't agree with your absolute joke of a protest and making completely farcical points about the economy, politics etc. and you expect to become the 99%? Christ on a bike. 60-70 people showed up, shows that nobody cares about the lot of you. Drawing dole and sitting in a tent, sure some have it awful easy. I prefer to see Ministers getting over 100K, at least they're trying to fix the economy, rather than sponge from it. It's just amazing to think that you've been there so long, not made any plans, not done one positive thing for Galway (in fact, cause a nuisance until ye eventually moved to beside the fountain when the market was here.) Ye are THE laughing stock of Galway and I honestly don't think that's an understatment. All you do is spout bulls**t on this forum, making redundant points, abusing others. Surprised you havn't been perma-banned. Surprised your camp hasn't been perma-bulldozed either.
You will never, ever become the 99% and for that I'm thankful. You will never gain enough support, ever, and that makes me happy inside. Why? Because it shows the vast vast majority of Irish people to be smart individuals, who are going to follow people with PLANS to save the economy. You have no plans. At all. And you've been there for over 4 months. What the hell have ye been doing for 4 months like? Absolute jokeshop, and the sooner that eyesore is removed from Eyre Square the better. I'm sure some of you protestors own houses, why not set up in a back garden or something? Be just as pointless...
great post.. this is the first thread I have looked into since joining.0 -
Advertisement
-
Deleted User wrote: »so, 60-70 people turned up at the protest. Hardly like 99% representation there hippygran and eireman.
In terms of Galway population thats not even 1% let alone 99%
More people support Galway United than your urban camping ground and thats really saying something
If this doesnt show you how little the level of support for your urban camping ground then i dont know what will
I don't understand this comment..the protest wasn't organised by Occupy Galway, it was organised by the ULA, and consisted of members of the Galway public ranging from mothers with young children to OAPs. The protest had nothing to do with showing support for the camp, it was to show opposition to the household tax.0 -
-
I don't understand this comment..the protest wasn't organised by Occupy Galway, it was organised by the ULA, and consisted of members of the Galway public ranging from mothers with young children to OAPs. The protest had nothing to do with showing support for the camp, it was to show opposition to the household tax.
So you're saying it wasn't supported the defenders of the 99% o.g.?0 -
In fact, there was an emailed retraction from, I believe, Declan Varney at the Advertiser, that was posted on Facebook.
And Declan Varley's (Galway Advertiser..) response..
Hi Andy,
Hope you're keeping well. The initial report concerning the chair was sent by our reporter at the meeting who was seated close to the incident. It now appears that there were chairs inside a door that was pushed in and that these chairs went into the room when the doors were charged.
This may have led the reporter to believe that the chairs came from the intervention into the room. We were not the only news organisation to report that this was the case, so there was understandable confusion and shock at the intensity of the attempt to get into the room — a room which is normally unaccustomed to such events.
I explained this online this evening and stated the most recent information. There was no attempt to sensationalise or dramatise the events, and therefore it is important that the record is set straight.
I would love to have the video for the FB page though, if you could get your hands on it. All the best and good to talk to you one to one like this.
dv
To be fair to his paper, they were quick to remove the FB comment about the "Chairgate" when told the facts...0 -
well excuse me for ranting while seeing what we're swallowing as regards politics in this country!
also i was reporting those insisting on quoting false news reports which have since been taken down altogether or edited to remove mentions of chairs being or attempted at being thrown.
i honestly wish you all the best in life and hope we at the occupy camp can prove you wrong sooner rather than later.
You cannot report people for talking about something that was in te news regardless if the newspaper got it wrong
What do u mean by prove us wrong? Would you rather everyone in Ireland joins your little movement until we have gone back to the stone age
Also stop being a little patronising (cu next Tuesday) to anyone who tries to have an adult disscussion with you
Mod note: user banned for insult0 -
I don't understand this comment..the protest wasn't organised by Occupy Galway, it was organised by the ULA, and consisted of members of the Galway public ranging from mothers with young children to OAPs. The protest had nothing to do with showing support for the camp, it was to show opposition to the household tax.
No but I asked what the occupy movement do and I was given a recording from that protest and it was backed up by eire man0 -
Hello world wrote: »No but I asked what the occupy movement do and I was given a recording from that protest and it was backed up by eire man
Ok..so you were told that OG took part in that protest and then went on to say that the low numbers showed lack of support for the camp. I still don't see how you made that connection. The protest was nothing to do with showing support for the camp. I suppose you could say that it shows that most people are in favour of the household tax, but I think we all know that isn't true.0 -
If they make it so summer, won't dirty backpackers and (more) hippies join the protest as a free way of setting up a tent in the middle of Eyre Square? Back when I was a poor dirty backpacking hippy I would have jumped at the chance the pitch a tent in the middle of town for nothing.0
-
Hello world wrote: »No but I asked what the occupy movement do and I was given a recording from that protest and it was backed up by eire man
Ok..so you were told that OG took part in that protest and then went on to say that the low numbers showed lack of support for the camp. I still don't see how you made that connection. The protest was nothing to do with showing support for the camp. I suppose you could say that it shows that most people are in favour of the household tax, but I think we all know that isn't true.
No I asked what the occupy Galway people stand for because I thought they didn't even know what they stand for. and I was given a link to the audio for the household tax protest. I think that is a fair connection to make. And this has just validated my original point that the occupy people actually don't know what they are standing for and perhaps is they were more straightforward their supporters might even know what they are protesting against0 -
If they make it so summer, won't dirty backpackers and (more) hippies join the protest as a free way of setting up a tent in the middle of Eyre Square? Back when I was a poor dirty backpacking hippy I would have jumped at the chance the pitch a tent in the middle of town for nothing.
Believe me, anyone with that type of thinking won't stay more than one night. It is hard work camping in Eyre Square, have you walked through the square in the early hours of the morning..with drunks kicking over the bins, smashing bottles, shouting and roaring at each other, terrorising local shopkeepers? It really isn't an easy thing to do, and you certainly don't get much in the way of sleep!0 -
Advertisement
-
Hello world wrote: »No I asked what the occupy Galway people stand for because I thought they didn't even know what they stand for. and I was given a link to the audio for the household tax protest. I think that is a fair connection to make. And this has just validated my original point that the occupy people actually don't know what they are standing for and perhaps is they were more straightforward their supporters might even know what they are protesting against[/QUOTE
That still doesn't change the fact that the support of the protest has no connection with support of OG. That was the point I was making.0 -
antoobrien wrote: »So you're saying it wasn't supported the defenders of the 99% o.g.?
Again, I don't really understand your question..I am saying that members of OG attended the protest as individuals who oppose the household tax. The protest was called by the ULA and the Campaign against the household tax. It was attended by householders who oppose the household tax. How many people attended it has nothing to do with who does or doesn't support OG.0 -
That still doesn't change the fact that the support of the protest has no connection with support of OG. That was the point I was making.
ok but then why are people who apprently go to the camp telling me that there is a connection and now you are telling me there is no connection? This is a prime example that the occupy Galway people dont even know what they are protesting against0 -
Don't care if I get banned tbh, but you're an idiot, plain and simple. You ever been to Terryland? Probably not.and the analogy you used above included a bust football club who had Nick Leeson (Barings bank dodgy dealer!!) controlling finances!!
oh the ironing
People see you cursing, abusing posters who don't agree with your absolute joke of a protest and making completely farcical points about the economy, politics etc. and you expect to become the 99%? Christ on a bike. 60-70 people showed up, shows that nobody cares about the lot of you. Drawing dole and sitting in a tent, sure some have it awful easy. I prefer to see Ministers getting over 100K, at least they're trying to fix the economy, rather than sponge from it. It's just amazing to think that you've been there so long, not made any plans, not done one positive thing for Galway (in fact, cause a nuisance until ye eventually moved to beside the fountain when the market was here.) Ye are THE laughing stock of Galway and I honestly don't think that's an understatment. All you do is spout bulls**t on this forum, making redundant points, abusing others. Surprised you havn't been perma-banned. Surprised your camp hasn't been perma-bulldozed either.
You will never, ever become the 99% and for that I'm thankful. You will never gain enough support, ever, and that makes me happy inside. Why? Because it shows the vast vast majority of Irish people to be smart individuals, who are going to follow people with PLANS to save the economy. You have no plans. At all. And you've been there for over 4 months. What the hell have ye been doing for 4 months like? Absolute jokeshop, and the sooner that eyesore is removed from Eyre Square the better. I'm sure some of you protestors own houses, why not set up in a back garden or something? Be just as pointless...
you dont care if you get banned!!!
politicians earning over 100k and are trying to help fix things!! HOW?? you do realise these inept idiots and all those around them are on sometimes double the rates of their international cohorts for doing a ****e job, enda kenny on more than obama and cameron ffs!! Patrick Honahan is on double what the head of the federal reserve is on. Mary harney is on thousands a fcuking week for her service to the country. the same tramp who had no money in the last quarter of a particular year to pay for girls to be immunised against ovarian cancer yet only a matter of weeks later the government had €50,000,000 for the farmers due to the pigs fiasco and we being left with no bacon for xmas, such a tragedy, the ovarian cancer and not the sick piggies!!
ARE YOU FOR REAL?? DO YOU NOT SEE THE FCUKING CORRUPTION GOING ON?!? MASSIVE PAY FOR SCHOOL TEACHERS (gombeens!!) AND BARRISTERS ETC AND DON'T EVEN GET ME STARTED ON PENSIONS.
We are the opposite to a laughing stock actually and you directly insult the thousands of Galwegians, Irish and foreign people who have shown their support the last 100 days!! One of the first questions i ask anyone who stops by or I manage to stop for a chat is ; wait for it, "Is this camp an eye-sore?" and it seems to be only called that by those who have a bee in their bonnet against the protest.
I must have hit a serious nerve with the whole GU going bust and employing the services of a FCUKING ROGUE BANKER that brought down a whole bank and caused a lot of financial damage. How he ended up at GU has always perplexed me!
I wont be permabanned cos i wont be breaking the rules here anymore, we cant be removed from eyre square either.
I dont see your logic in camping out our back lawns, its hardly a public space to engage with hundreds and thousands of people!!
and I'm the difficult one to chat with am I??0 -
Hello world wrote: »ok but then why are people who apprently go to the camp telling me that there is a connection and now you are telling me there is no connection? This is a prime example that the occupy Galway people dont even know what they are protesting against
what? You are making no sense to me. A member of OG said that we took part in the protest, as I understand it, which some of us did. You said that the low numbers of protestors showed that there is no support for the camp...I am saying that the protest wasn't organised by OG, therefore the numbers attending do not bear any relation to support for the camp.
I am not going to continue going round in circles with this...yes, some OG members were at the protest. They are homeowners who object to the household tax, along with everyone else who was there.0 -
Hello world wrote: »
well excuse me for ranting while seeing what we're swallowing as regards politics in this country!
also i was reporting those insisting on quoting false news reports which have since been taken down altogether or edited to remove mentions of chairs being or attempted at being thrown.
i honestly wish you all the best in life and hope we at the occupy camp can prove you wrong sooner rather than later.
You cannot report people for talking about something that was in te news regardless if the newspaper got it wrong
Also stop being a little patronising (cu next Tuesday) to anyone who tries to have an adult disscussion with you
i would like a mod to make a judgement regarding your first point,
seeing as I was there and you refused to accept my true and honest account of what happened and threw it back in my face on a number of occasions (i will never believe you over the media type replies) that I was just some random internet poster yet at the same time you admitted a day or 2 later you were busy believing other people who were there and posting anonymously on here (all because they shared your agenda I believe, I may be wrong but you can't say what ya did and then blatantly contradict yourself!!)
I am going to throw your last paragraph right back at you HW.0 -
Don't care if I get banned tbh, but you're an idiot, plain and simple. You ever been to Terryland? Probably not.
Hope you are banned, no place for this tripe
You will never, ever become the 99% and for that I'm thankful. You will never gain enough support, ever, and that makes me happy inside. Why? Because it shows the vast vast majority of Irish people to be smart individuals, who are going to follow people with PLANS to save the economy. You have no plans. At all. And you've been there for over 4 months. What the hell have ye been doing for 4 months like? Absolute jokeshop, and the sooner that eyesore is removed from Eyre Square the better. I'm sure some of you protestors own houses, why not set up in a back garden or something? Be just as pointless...
1: We/he/us are the 99%, i'm afraid there is nothing you can do to change that!!
2. "Follow people with Plans" Hitler had a plan, and people followed him, didn't turn out great that one!!. Also what plan, the plan of taxing/cutting a nation out of a depression, well news flash, didn't work,, never worked!! maybe another 5 years of it though eh!! (whats you plan???)
and this notion that OWS have no objectives is stupid, perhaps you should check there website!!
WAKE UP0 -
Was I the only one that read the front page of the advertiser this week and had a chuckle?
Hmmmmmm....lower rate of incidents in Eyre Square when there's a presence there...that doesn't exactly suggest to me that the protestors should be allowed to stay but rather there should be extra Garda presence around there. I think every man and his dog knew that before the protesting started
When talking to people from outside Galway they are suprised at the very few Garda that patrol the place at the end of the night. It's such a small town with very evident hot spots for violence at the end of the night and they just don't bother.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
what? You are making no sense to me. A member of OG said that we took part in the protest, as I understand it, which some of us did. You said that the low numbers of protestors showed that there is no support for the camp...I am saying that the protest wasn't organised by OG, therefore the numbers attending do not bear any relation to support for the camp.
I am not going to continue going round in circles with this...yes, some OG members were at the protest. They are homeowners who object to the household tax, along with everyone else who was there.
No I asked what the protestors are protesting against, as someone who was completely ignorant to what the occupy protestors stand for. The. I was given a link to the audio of some occupy Galway member talking about the household tax (this was then backed up by Eire man) so I assumed they are against the household tax. Now you are coming along and saying the occupy people have nothing to do with the tax. And now im saying how do you expect to have any support when ye can't even decide what you stand for?0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement