Emperor Still Minus Clothing.

David Dickson wrote the following here.

"“Occupy” also made the [banished words] list, due to the Occupy Wall Street movement, which has sprouted up copycat groups nationwide, from Occupy Oakland to Occupy Ann Arbor." - my edit for clarity

No.  This is simply Bullshit.  "Occupy" may have made the list, but only an idiot or ideologue would state the rest.  There are no copycat groups. Occupy is a single movement of many people with some disparate goals, but an overall need to make the voice of Everyman/Everywoman as resonant as that of the wealthy.  That it has manifested nearly everywhere is due in part to lazy, sloppy, and biased reporting currently on offer.  In fact, I'd say that over time the so-called reporting inside articles such as the one above, has in no small way, added to the disparity as concerns income and to the faux claim of equal opportunity for all.  A claim that's for a long time now, been camouflage for the behind the scenes machinations of the powerful and their sycophant "news" organizations who make claims to be consumed by people who are so used to being marketed to, that they can no longer distinguish between fact and assertion.

Off that topic - slightly:

Opportunity still exists, but the powers that be have quietly erected barriers to entry so high, that the average person, even one with an advanced education, will find it more than just difficult to assault.  It's easier if you're tall, attractive and deep voiced - not to mention well-connected and very lucky.  But it's a lot more complex than just working hard or being lucky.  For instance, if you want to open a McDonalds franchise you will need to be in possession of over a million dollars of non-leveraged (unmortgaged) property in liquid form (cash, bonds, other securities) or don't bother.  Much the same is true of other non-franchise enterprises, but at least there you can borrow (from relatives - banks will laugh at you).  Thus taking your family down with you if you're underfunded for cash-flow emergencies (and almost everyone is - except those from wealthy families).

David then goes on to state:

"But the word and the movement’s message has been co-opted by the very corporate interests the Occupy movement stands against. "    

Another stinking pile.  Who equates Jay-Z's t-shirts with the Occupy movement other than a single lazy and sloppy reporter who makes sweeping unsupported statements such as the one above?  He's probably hoping to bullshit the easily bullshat citizenry still waiting to see clothes suddenly appear on the naked emperor.

Look, don't burn the goddamned flag!  I don't care how passionate a person is, committing some acts or using some language does more damage to your cause than any outsider possibly could.  You want the American public to embrace your movement?  Don't do or say anything that will cause the average Joe to think you're just another punk-ass, spoiled brat, ungrateful, parasite who is bound and determined to get someone else to pay/take responsibility.

Burning the US flag is not free speech.  It's stupid.  Using Communist or Socialist terminology or jargon such as "the peoples whatever," is equally stupid.  The Average American does not pay all that much attention in history or civics class.  Most just want to put in their time, graduate, drink beer and have sex.  They're not the least bit interested in politics or deductive logic.  Most, in fact, are much more likely to be interested in the existence of ghosts or zombies than any evidence that it's not possible for such things to exist.

They are, though, very susceptible to the claims of demagogues.  People who play on their emotions rather than presenting  cogent logical arguments supporting one abstract position or another.  So, when you behave in ways that allow the demagogues to say "see, I told you they were un-American," all you're doing is making the demagogues' lives easier and yours harder.  I don't care how good it feels to burn or damage some symbol, don't burn the fucking flag, moron!  it's stupid!

Zero.  As in nobody, not even bots are reading what I've written lately.  Okay, I'm not exactly a scintillating writer.  On the other hand, I might be worth a glance or two.  Maybe I should ask for donations?  Just about every source I read is asking for donations at the moment.  Some of them in ways that piss me off, like Democracy Now's flash screen that forces you to bypass it's not-very-subtle demand for moola.  Hell, those people have WAY more money than I do.  Instead of asking me for mine, they should be offering  me a share of theirs.  Anyway, I'm still concerned that I'm just wasting my time.

A shorty.  I found this article in a list of news articles I used Google notifications to read.  I often refer to myself as an independent or a left-leaning independent.  And according to the article, I must be right 'cause I don't really fit either list.  On the "liberal" list, I watch Masterpiece, but very rarely as most of the time when I dial up PBS, Antique Road Show is on.  I loathe that show.

As for the "conservative" list I watch CSI and Top Gear.

Actually, I think the report is probably so much bullshit.  Most of the "liberals" I know read.  The TV shows I'm aware of that "liberals" watch include such things as NOVA and shows on the Science channel, National Geographic channel and so on.  As for "conservatives" I'm less sure.  One that I know fits the description of cop shows but wouldn't watch a Barrett-Jackson auction for anything.

What else do I watch?  Movies.  In particular Science Fiction, adventure and thrillers. Favorite TV shows?  At the moment, Warehouse 13 and The Walking Dead.

In looking at my profile and then my previous post, I'm going to amend the politicized comment a bit.  As I said, the Occupy Wall Street movement is probably the most important political movement in the 21st century.  But how different is it from the Vietnam Veterans of America movement?  Not very in several aspects.  A lot of what motivated Vietnam vets to get involved with Bobby Mueller's organization had to do with jobs, income inequality and virtually no political voice in Washington.  At the time, the VFW and American Legion guys seemed to see VN vets as some sort of  second class bunch not fighting a war, but rather a "police action."  This despite night after night of gruesome battle footage on all three major networks.

So, how bad was unemployment?  Really bad.  I can't remember actual statistics anymore, but VN vet unemployment was probably double that of non vets or vets who no longer claimed to be vets.  But that's only part of it.  African American unemployment was staggering.  Something like 20%.  And Peurto Rican vets?  Almost double that of what were known then as Blacks (I note that the spell checker does not recognize "Peurto Rico.")

How 'bout education?  Well, by then the congress had pretty well stripped the GI Bill educational component.  Whereas a WWII vet could get tuition and books (not to exceed 500 dollars per year) and a monthly stipend, a Vietnam vet got a monthly allowance based on whether s/he was full time or part time.  In either case the monthly amount for the Vietnam era was absurd.  Nobody would have been able to go to school, raise a family and buy books/supplies on the pittance referred to.  Most vets were obliged to hold down a job while attending university or some other form of higher education and/or to borrow the money through student loans.

These factors and one other issue concerning veterans who were unable to appeal denials of compensation benefits except through the same VA boards that had denied them in the first place, motivated me to get involved.  But my horizon then was narrow and only involved the rights of Vietnam veterans.

So, now I'm re-engaged but at a much more intense level supporting the issues raised by Occupy Wall Street and other 99% movements.

I'm coming to the stunning conclusion that I've become politicized.  For a long time, I payed attention to candidate/party positions and voted.  When the election passed I pretty much went back into a state of semi-apathy.

Slowly, beginning with the SCOTUS decision that effectively elected George W. Bush and the ensuing political and military mayhem, I've begun to become quite alarmed.  I'm actually quite appalled these days by the manipulation of facts called "narratives" that are being used by political and religious bodies to misinform, misshape and in general to leave a steaming pile that the fans of "real Americans" like Sarah Palin don't seem to be able to see around, through or over.

So, it could be that my decision to title this blog the way I did might be more appropriate than I'd anticipated.  So, is lying always lying?  No, I don't think it is.  Take a look at my first installment  and click the links for belief preservation and confirmation bias.  In essence what happens is that people are very reluctant to give up anything they already believe.  And a good deal of what we believe, we get from our parents or our geographical peers.  We become "fans" of what is familiar to us.  And the other?  Well, it becomes "Other."  Denoting undesirable, lesser, them.

The Occupy Wall Street movement or the 99% are attempting to subvert that.  We are being invited to directly participate in a possible future free of the marketing that encourages "fandom."  We're being asked to broaden our ideas of who or what constitute "us."  That in itself is a startling and in my view, refreshing idea.  At the same time, we're being asked to rise up against the moneyed interests and their enforcers comprised of police, military and sycophants nowadays known as "fanboys."

This leaves me with a rather good feeling.  The last time I felt this was when some older students at my high school invited me to join them for conversation and socialization.  I was not a member of their "clique" so it both surprised and flattered me.  I went with them to Kent (of Kent state University fame), sat in a large round booth in a club called the Rathskeller. I listened to conversation about such things as co-ops and communes.  These people were hip.  To call them Hippies would be to miss the point.  They already knew then about Diggers.  I just discovered what Diggers were about a month ago.  Anyway, they eventually all went off to university or became semi-famous musicians and I joined the army.  I wish I could say that I don't know why I did what I did, but I do.  Back then, it was known as the Generation Gap.  My parents and I did not see eye-to-eye on much.  The military offered a way to be independent of them, to survive and to become educated.  So, I elected to pursue that route.  And now, it appears, I've come full circle.  The politicization that began in 1966 and was interrupted by more immediate matters appears to have resumed.

As I learn, I will attempt to chronicle the learning here.  I already have a good start.  I've been studying the history of religion with a focus on Christianity for over a decade.  I'm pretty well read there, and it appears that politics and religion are at the very least kissing cousins.

Okay, a change of tack.  The statistic thingy is telling me I've been read over 200 times, but I suspect those reads are just bots crawling all over the web looking for stories to send/sell to news/opinion aggregators.  So, I'm just going to use this space for what might become random thoughts/ideas.

At the moment, I'm plugged into a live stream of OWS/99% protesters occupying an area adjacent to an empty lot owned by Trinity church properties.  Occupy Wall Street would like to occupy the space.  The church is refusing to grant permission on the grounds that by providing such things as bathroom facilities, blankets, some food and hot coco, that they've done enough.  Typical of churches.  Big on appearance but very little actual substance.  Trinity owns most of lower Manhattan, so they're anything but part of the 99%.  Again, typical.  My experience is that churches and religions are relentlessly hypocritical when it comes to power - either political or economic.  They're the polar opposites of their Biblical heroes such as Moses and Jesus.  But they're more than just blind to the fact that for enough silver, they'll sell out not only those fictional leaders, but anyone and everyone else.

Back to the OWS.  First, I think this may be the most important political activity of the 21st century.  It has the potential to bring about real change for everyday people by wresting a fraction of the power held by the moneyed interests.  One of the first people to be involved is David Graeber who is an anthropology professor/writer and an anarchist.  Don't be afraid of that term.  Anarchists are not nihilists.  He advocates a position similar to that of the Diggers.  What both advocate is a political/economic system free of the importance of money and/or police/military.

That said, I'm a little pissed today 'cause when I tried a link from an OWS name on twitter earlier, I was directed to a video stream where I had to watch a commercial in order to see what was going on in NYC.  It wasn't worth watching the commercial in order to watch a few people standing around waiting for something to happen.  Eventually people are going to make a tidal wave of profit from this movement.  Some will be the Abbie Hoffmans who exploit whoever and whatever for the advancement of self.  some will be decent people prior to becoming spoiled by the money, others will be the usual ghouls who people now recognize as zombies.  Only these zombies are attracted to money rather than flesh.  I hate to be negative, but it's only a matter of time 'till people prey on the good intentions of almost anyone (including me) involved with the movement.

More later