The Occupation Continues 11/25/11

While Ed Rogers for The Washington Post denounces, and dismisses the Occupy Movement as "rambling stoners, malcontents, and Grateful Dead camp followers" a few still brave the elements to attend a General Assembly in the rain while Chicago begins to light the night in festive marketing gimmickry to entice the buying public. So much for Rogers "never destined to survive the onset of inclement weather. Good riddance" BS. Solidarity!

Make a video - it's fun, easy and free!
www.onetruemedia.com

Violence

For the most part I am going to address this essay on violence from the voice of the intellect. Mind you, I am the first to tell you that my gut screams “get the bastards!” I understand the frustration. I understand the motivations of the Black Block (the real ones, not the police provocateurs). I understand that there may be some cause for which the universe demands the blood of the guilty to be spilled. However, not here; not now.

Benedictine University released the survey results of Occupy Chicago on Thursday, November 24, 2011. One of the things it found is that, “58 percent agreed that violence against government can be justified.” Historically, that is understandable.

The U.S.A. was born of revolution, and there is no shortage of burning quotes from the past to stir the soul to grand deeds of true bravery in the face of a tyrannical foe. I’ll leave you to look those up for yourself. Sociologically, it is understandable as well. Chicago is a twin fisted city that works. It is a city with tough blue collar ethic; it is a city with little patience for unending dialogue. Manuel "Mannie" Garcia O'Kelly-Davis, of Heinlein’s The Moon is a Harsh Mistress would feel right at home in Chicago – if it weren’t for Earth’s heavy gravity. Being those factors, history and sociology are both aligned to justify violence, why denounce it? Basically, violence does not work.

On September 11, 2001 nineteen hijackers flew three airliners into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Their rational was to teach America a lesson for the corporate games the U.S. allows in the Islamic World. The immediate aftermath left 2,996 dead. Since then, in retaliation to the event the death toll in Afghanistan and Iraq is arguable exceeding 100 times that number. Most of them are civilians; many of them non-combatants. Whatever the lesson was that the hijackers wanted to teach the U.S., another lesson has been learned. Violence is not going to work when it comes to the unseating the 1% who have usurped control of the United States, and the rest of the Western Developed World.

I don’t say this to denounce violence. I’ve been trained in it.

As I stated long ago in acute situations violence may be necessary. That acute situation is when there is no alternative in an open field of combat. If someone is going to kill you and there is no alternative but to disable them, then the action is justified. I know there are those who would decry that statement out of some mythical vision of Ghandi who walked on water, but even Ghandi was a pragmatist, and his revolution was not bloodless.

I am pointing out that violence in an otherwise political debate only leads to more violence, and violence is a game that the U.S. forces play all too well. We have seen that in the heavy handed crack-down, sanction by the highest offices in the U.S. government, against the peaceful Occupation protestors. Any direct violence against the forces of the U.S. oligarchy will leave our children dead, and ravaged on the street. That is not something that you really want.

We don’t fight against flesh and blood. We are fighting the inane idea that we are owned. In that fight there is room to impose economic loss upon the 1%ers. There are many ways of doing just that. Strikes work. Boycotts work. Sabotage works. I have pointed this entire line of reasoning out before the occupation began. Violence is the 1%’s game, however, and they know it all too well.

Besides, you don’t have to resort to their game when you are already winning at yours.

Solidarity.

Happy Thanksgiving Day 2011

Two months ago today, I caught up with a small group of independent civic minded young citizens who took it upon themselves to voice their objections to the state of the nation. Their base camp was in front of the Federal Reserve bank (230 South La Salle Street Chicago, IL 60604). Two months later the #OccupyChicago (#OccupyChi) is now known nationally as being the successful branch of the occupation without a base camp.

They have gone from being blanketed with a new black-out to getting coverage from national outlets. Even Obama has been "Mic Checked" by Occupiers at a recent stump speech. And this was covered respectfully by CBS News.

They have gone from depending on blogs, like this one, to being within a hair's breath of publishing their own newspaper. Occupy Wall Street has published the Occupy Wall Street Journal, and Occupy Chicago is about to publish the Occupy Chicago Tribune.

A few weeks ago, one of the prominent members of the group, gently pointed out that I've never said anything at any General Assembly.

He is right. Over the past two months I have not addressed the general assemble, though I have taken part in a few votes. I have not written anything, nor attempted to direct the group in any way. I have lent support in some background information which may help. And, used my Kodak to archive the events I have attended. That is my extend of "active support."

As I have watched the movement grow and change. I have not seen anything which would require my input. While bumpy, and somewhat messy at times, Occupy Chicago has, and continues to be, on the right track. The group manages, very well, to overcome problems, and work around issues and conflicts. More to the point, they do it better than I could. As such, most of what I have done with them, and for them, is to write what I see, and keep a video archive of the past 60 days. I have no great need to promote myself as being of any importance in this world, or to the movement. The Occupy Movement is doing just fine without my interjection. Just fine indeed.

On this Thanksgiving Day 2011, I am truly thankful that the rebellion is in the street, and that today's rebels are dedicated to peaceful resistance. Happy Thanksgiving, Occupy Chicago, and all the Occupation sites around the nation.

Make a video - it's fun, easy and free!
www.onetruemedia.com

November 19, 2011 GA in Chicago

It was a warm evening by the lake. Occupy Chicago was still small group this evening. It is a social hangover from the raucous events of Thursday, November 17, 2011, when OccupyChi linked up with Stand Up Chicago to celebrate in action the two month anniversary of Occupy Wall Street. Small numbers notwithstanding the core of OccupyChi mounted a protest, march, and General Assembly in Solidarity with all Occupied Cities around the world.

Make a video - it's fun, easy and free!
www.onetruemedia.com

Two Months Ago

Two months ago today about 1000 passionate patriots took to the streets of Manhattan. Since then phrased like “Occupy” and “99%” have taken on a whole new meaning. I guess I could go look it up; I have utterly lost count of how many other cities around the world have joined in the Occupy Movement.

Occupy protests around the world: full list visualized

It is well over 144 covering the globe. Most of them are disorganized. Most of them are hounded by police. And, most of them have stood their ground peacefully to show the world the dark underbelly of the United States of America. The few are frightened of the many that have stood peacefully for morality, and an ethical society.

There are a few who love to point to one incident or another to discredit the Occupy Movement. However, after the provocation by police at the beck and call of the socioeconomic elite if the Occupy Movement was not committed to self-sacrificial, non-violent protest Oakland, California was be a smolder wreck right now, and New York, New York, Dallas, Texas, and Portland, Oregon (to name but a few) would be in flames.

Media Matters

Once again, last night, I was in the awkward position of defending the Occupation in other cities. While the detractors will allow me to say that the ills heaped on the Occupation may not be happening in Chicago, they are happening here, or here, or here. Main stream media, courted so much by the Occupation’s General Assemblies and various Press Corps, is trashing the movement. I’ll not give credence to the media produced hysteria by reposting it here. It is sufficient to say ill-willed, opinion driven, cynical reporters loath the chaos of the leaderless masses of the Occupation.

The main stream media is reporting the occupation as the rule of the mob. Yet, essentially, the Occupation is run under a classic Greek style of Democracy dating back before the time of Jesus Christ. Somehow this is unacceptable. So, why is the Occupation courting them? I can only say that the Occupation has not been thinking far enough outside the box to get the message out. There are a few who have, but those outlets are still web based, and far too easy to ignore. The web is a cacophony of conflicting ideas run by search engines which post listings based on popularity. That is not the swiftest way to accumulate accurate information.

Crime

There is this idea that blames the Occupation for sexual assaults, murders, theft, and other crimes within the now dwindling encampments. This gives righteous justification for the authorities to disband the peaceful gathering of people protesting for a better world. Somehow, as it has been pointed out by a few in the media (including Allison Kilkenny), the failure of the society outside the camp is acceptable and understandable, but when the same social ills enter the camps, it proves that Daddy Government knows best, and the camp is the cause of the problem. I can guarantee you that the murder, thief, rapist did not grow up in the shadow of the Occupation’s General Assembly, and did not become dysfunctional due to the presence of the Occupation. Those criminals are the direct by-product of the condition of humanity inside, or outside the Occupation. How many hundreds of years’ worth Criminological data has to be cited to prove that obvious point?

Winter Blues?

People seem to think that the coming winter will be the demise of the Occupation movement, and some, who have never stood for anything more than a paycheck, a six pack, and the right to party, are quick to insult the Occupiers. It is no secret that the original time table including wrapping up the Occupation in late November. It was set later in Chicago. In Chicago that date was December 23, 2011 to be exact. So, if the Occupiers have enough sense to come out of the cold, it is to their credit, not their shame. The only shame resides with those who have used brutal force to suppress the best in society. That shows exactly why it is necessary to continue the protest in other venues.

Checking In

This is the first Saturday since September 24, 2011 that I was not downtown at OccupyChi. I figured I would take a moment this weekend to check in with my YouTube friends.

This is, as usual, unrehearsed and off the cuff. Even I know that is never a good idea for a broadcast, but it is honest.

The occupation continues pretty much unabated in spite of the interference of the establishment.

On a personal note, I am writing again, and my back is slowly getting stronger. The new blog is http://occupythewhole.blogspot.com/.

Make a video - it's fun, easy and free!
www.onetruemedia.com

Race Relations

The inspiration for this entry comes from a Tweet by @deprogrammer9.

The only social "class" that actually exists is humanity. Everything else is a lie.

At the very big risk of being labeled a resist, I have one question about humanity that sticks in my craw: What happened?

We know that Homo sapiens first appeared in Central Africa. We know that our far distant ancestors migrated up the Riff Valley. We know they populated the Near East, Middle East, and Far East. We know they spread into Europe. We know they were probably dark skinned, with tight curly hair. This is at least my understanding of the chain of events. So, what happened?

How did we lose our pigmentation, and hair, and advanced understand of math, and complex rhythms? Moreover, how did the Europeans decided that being pale was superior to being pigmented? And how did it come about that the idea of inferiority was sold to others who were more like our common ancestors? It may have something to do with our acceptance of Neanderthal mates in some far time of lost antiquity. That we have traced through DNA research. And as broadcast by the BBC in 2001, it may simply be a device to explain a fluke of history by the Greeks of ancient times. I simply do not know.

Again, I have to refer to past research.

The idea that there is some kind of Anglo-Saxon racial superiority is a myth. It is, however, a myth which dies a hard death as heard in the last lines of Tony Blair’s resignation speech on May 10, 2007. Mr. Blair stated, “The British are special. The world knows it. In our innermost thoughts, we know it. This is the greatest nation on earth.” While there is nothing wrong with patriotism, this is the same kind of rhetoric for which the U.S. has been criticized during the current Bush administration.

There is no discussion on U.S. domination which does not include race relations. Race relations in the U.S. have never been amicable. The discussion on the Anglo-Saxon domination is in no way to be misconstrued as an endorsement of European racial superiority. The recent Anglo-Saxon cultural, economic and political domination of the globe is simply historic fact. Over the past 6000 years of human history, there have been many different ruling cultures and expressions.

At the dawn of Western history, the known world was ruled by the Egyptians. They ruled the west far longer than the Anglo-Saxon line has ruled in recent history. Racism, according to a BBC report broadcast in the early days of the current decade, goes back to the enlightened Greeks who gave us the ideals of self-determination and the republic form of government. Others argue that it first appeared in Spain between 722, and 1492. In some ways it is a relatively new idea. In other ways it is simply a form of tribal based discrimination. It can be said that India’s cast system has its roots in such tribalism. Even there, however, some argue that racism has its roots in socioeconomic distinctions. According to Wikipedia’s article on caste, the word is derived from the Roman casta meaning which can mean lineage or race. While the racist root of the Indian system of institutional discrimination is well known, it is ignored for the sake of economic opportunity and corporations ignore this.

The United States as a constitutional democratic republic has existed for 220 years. That is just over one tenth of the span from the year zero to today. Political, cultural, and racial equality is a relatively new dynamic to the nation’s landscape. Some members of minorities in the U.S. have successfully taken advantage of opportunities made available since 1964. Yet, others still suffer the stigma, and have grievous resentment of the sting of past racial oppression. Many minorities still cry in outrage for unwise racial innuendos.

Racial equality is so new that there is a fear that this fragile equity will be swept aside as quickly as it was brought in. Some fear it is already happening. After 100 years of struggle against racial oppression (1865 to 1965) the gains are still new, and the details and social expression of equity are still malleable. Any loss of status (perceived or real) could begin the decay of gains of the last 43 years. Moreover, minorities in the United States are still disproportionately impoverished as a percentage of the population. There is no doubt that there is still a lot of room for improvement in the United States when it comes to full equality and racial acceptance. But, improvements are being made.

In the science of criminology there is a theory known as labeling theory. It is used to explain why a mischievous child can grow up to be a hardened criminal. The constant reinforcement of the child being told he is “bad,” “stupid” or “lazy” will result in the child taking on those traits as he enters young adulthood. This is the very reason why it is now socially unacceptable to use negative racial slurs. However, in society at large, labeling theory still plays out with negative effect. Every time a challenge is made that the predominant culture is acting in a discriminatory manner, the charge gets less and less sympathy.

If a person is chronically accused of being a racist, or is striving to keep racism in check, they will get to the point that they become immune to the reprimand. They will respond to the accuser with personal apathy if not animosity. They will come to accept the label and ignore any social stigma attached to the label. Once that occurs the accused loses all ability to exert any type of control to correct the offensive behavior.

Much of this immunity, or hostility, comes from the frame of reference. Anyone who began school, or was born, after 1965 has no knowledge of institutional racism in the United States. They never saw lynchings. They never saw “Whites Only” signs, or the “Colored Entrance” off the back alley. They know nothing about school segregation. They never saw the midnight raids by the men in white sheets. The only men in white sheets these people know are the pictures of terrorists from the Middle East.

At best, segregation and discrimination was something that was committed by their parents or grand-parents. To them, racism is just another form of political grappling, and in their collective, political cynicism they are sure that someone is making money from the hustle. Are they wrong in that opinion? These young men and women who are now addressing their own relative poverty and diminished economic opportunity have little concern for the plight of others who are, due to the legacy of state sanctioned institutional racism, still further down the economic scale than they are. It is even harder to come to grips with the social inequity due to race when they see, and hear, through the media, minorities who are better off than they are. Those minorities may be exceptional people, or they may be gifted tokens of the American Dream, but the majority uses them as examples of the successes of the racial equalization in the nation.

The history of rampant racism in the U.S. is fading to a form of dark mythology for younger Americans. Since racism is outlawed, and no longer state sponsored, they see it as a social issue of some isolated sub-cultures. The constant accusations of racism fall on deaf ears in the rising generation; they have no clue of what they are being accused of except as some kind of slur.

The further the generations get from the era of institutional racism and institutional oppression, the less effect the criticism will have on them. It is simply not real to the majority of the Anglo-Saxon citizens. It does not exist. The only thing that exists to the Anglo-Saxon majority is socioeconomic class. All issues revolve around economic resources and liquid assets. This is the real world for the Anglo-Saxon. The only focus is on acquiring and securing economic resources. There is no other issue. It all comes down to compete, win, or die. This is the U.S.A. today.

© 2008

On a side note: People accuse me of being a Marxist, Communist, or Socialist. I accept those label with a certain sense of honor. Having never read Marx (something I will soon correct), and my exposure to Socialism being from Sinclair writing in 1902, I can honestly tell you that the observations in my various works only goes to show that there is independent verification of the need, and drive, to a socialized economy in the world. I am a Socialist because Capitalism is a dismal failure. I will write more on that later.

As Such it is Criminal in Nature

After hours at work, when the crew thins out, the workplace becomes a bit casual. Towards the end of the day yesterday a short conversation cropped up between a couple of co-workers concerning the Occupation movement. The only reason I was even aware of it is that the conversation was taking place across a number of cubicles. It was despairing concern about events in Oakland, the recent murder outside Occupy Oakland, and a recent suicide at Occupy Vermont. While not openly supportive of the Occupation, the conversation showed that my co-workers are aware of what is happening around them. One of the conversationalist did concede that Oakland, California was not the safest city in the U.S.A. I consider that proof, if you will, that the Occupation is impacting people who would rather rub elbows with the 1%; the American Dream is not quite dead yet.

As I wrote, long ago,

Most people are decent. They want to live their lives within the acceptable norms of the sub-culture in which they were born. They want to assume that the political leadership, while questionable in competence, will not adversely affect them if they keep a low profile. These people do not think of doing things outside their cultural norm.

Or, to be more blunt, they want to work, collect a check, have enough to get by, get a decent beer buzz going on the weekend, and dream of what might be if they only got a decent break.

That observation raises a few questions. How did we get to a place where the American Dream is just that, a dream? And why are there thousands of people across the United States of America braving the elements to protest the current socioeconomic norm? What push the button?

All I can do is draw from my previous research:

November 2000 election has been a manifestation of a conservative revolution. To document all that has occurred since the conservative revolution is a work best suited for another time. It is sufficient within this discussion to note that it did happen, and what we have today is a result of that revolution. Cronyism, nepotism, and the stratification of socioeconomic levels are so common in today’s marketplace that they are core values within the current expression of institutional means. Whether or not this has hurt the U.S. society depends on one’s view of no-bid government contracts, security services provided through private organizations like Blackwater, corporate influences on the government at the expense of the citizens, and the return, for all intents and purposes, to the social goals and institutional means of 1902, as dramatized in Upton Sinclair’s The Jungle.

If the loss of 100 years of progress is acceptable, then this society, and the inevitable criminality of the privileged, is nirvana. If it is not acceptable, then the conservative revolution of November 2000 needs to be viewed as a failed social experiment, and we need to address where we are heading as a nation without the posturing and name calling.

The discussion, if there is one, needs to be based on what works and what doesn’t. A critical eye needs to be cast on how we define what works. Is it good for a society that a few should amass wealth through means which are essentially harmful and, as such, criminal, even if acceptable and legal? Are there other goals in a society comprised of 300 million people who are being neglected in pursuit of the primary goal? Moreover, how do we justify that being intelligent and gifted are now liabilities.

We give lip service to intelligence and education, but define it within the narrow parameters of what the business community deems of value to the corporation. That is a very narrow pathway. They control the allocation of economic resources.

It is at this point that we need to look at the warnings of economist Joseph Schumpeter.

“Schumpeter believed that capitalism would be destroyed by its successes. Capitalism would spawn, he believed, a large intellectual class that made its living by attacking the very bourgeois system of private property and freedom so necessary for the intellectual class's existence. And unlike Marx, Schumpeter did not relish the destruction of capitalism. He wrote: ‘If a doctor predicts that his patient will die presently, this does not mean that he desires it.’ ”[1]

This is seen in the E.U. today. While the E.U. is still filled with innovative ideas, it lacks the will necessary to engage in the “creative destruction” (another term coined by Schumpeter) necessary to push the capitalistic system forward. As one observer put it, the E.U. is like a museum where the children can look but not touch.

Within the dialogue of what is wrong with the United States, Robert Jensen wrote that the U.S. has become a nation of the clinically narcissistic.[2]

DSM-IV describes the disorder as “a pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy” that can be diagnosed when any five of these nine criteria are met:

1. a grandiose sense of self-importance.
2. preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love.
3. believes he or she is special and unique.
4. requires excessive admiration.
5. sense of entitlement.
6. interpersonally exploitative, taking advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends.
7. lacks empathy.
8. often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her.
9. shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes.

Narcissistic tendencies to self-aggrandize are not unique to the United States, of course. But given the predominance of U.S. power in the world, we should worry most about the consequences of such narcissism here.

If that is a valid critique, and it fits within the parameters of the mental health of the nation, then the E.U. has a very different form of the same illness. The E.U. is fixated on their “grandiose sense of self-importance” for what they were, and not who they are. They resemble the old high-school quarterback sitting in a seedy bar reminiscing about the glory days of passing the game winning touch-down as he awaits his next assignment at the local day labor agency. As the world passes the E.U. by, it dreams of what it once was.

As far as Schumpeter’s warning about the death of capitalism at the hands of the intellectual class living off the fat of the capitalistic system, his view is limited to the rising trend of the late 1940s. It is not the fat intellectual who now condemns capitalism, nor, for that matter the proletariat of Marx’s vision, but the disenfranchised of the current globalized trend.

These disenfranchised individuals do not want the destruction of capitalism, but look for opportunity to engage freely in the system. They want to express what Schumpeter called the unternehmergeist (entrepreneur-spirit) so vital in keeping capitalism alive. That spirit today, however, is caught up in providing vice as a viable service. It is lacking in vision and inventiveness.

We have a narcissistic fixation of image over substance and a predatory protectionism of that image. Our current image is that we are a productive nation.

This creates an environment where economic resources and opportunity are hampered at the local level, and where predatory competition can get out of control. This out of control predatory competition is essentially the root cause of all levels of criminal activity. The question then becomes: how do we put controls on predatory competition?

We have looked at Colvin’s coercion matrix at the extreme: constant, Coercive. While it does match what is happening in many corporations in the United States today, he does not write from a doomed perspective. He addresses the outcome of the Consistent, non-coercive environment. Colvin says, “This is a non-coercive type of control in which strong social support of both expressive and institutional needs are provided.”[3] This type of control, writes Colvin, “utilizes a combination of normative and remunerative control.”

• It produces the following social-psychological outcomes:
• Low anger.
• High self-control, based on internalization of norms.
• Internal locus of Control.
• High self-efficacy.
• Strong, positive, moral social bond.
• No modeling for coercive behavior.
• No perceived control deficit or control surplus (control balance).

And it produces the following behavioral outcomes:

• Generally non-criminal, non-delinquent.
• Strong tendency to engage in pro-social behavior ….

Pro-social behavior is not what we have in the United States today.

The idea that corporations have to be coercive in order to compete in the capitalistic system is in error. It flies in the face of basic human behavior, the known science of psychology, the facts presented in criminology, and basic common sense. Common sense, as we pretty much understand, is not common. Maybe in the business community quid pro quo is misconstrued as something for nothing, or the most amounts of labor and resources for the least amount of wages, but the human dynamic demands a certain reasonable exchange rate for services which allow survival within the economic environment. Paying someone poverty level wages, and doing all that can be done to squeeze them for basic necessities are not contained within the quid pro quo ideal. Something for something implies that the something given in exchange for services is of equal value. If corporations conspire to impoverish their employees, then the exchange is unequal and criminal in nature.

(c) 2008 Wealth, Women, and War

---

[1] "Biography of Joseph Alois Schumpeter". The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics. Library of Economics and Liberty. Retrieved November 28, 2007 from the World Wide Web: http://www.econlib.org/LIBRARY/Enc/bios/Schumpeter.html

[2] Jensen, R. (2006, April 18). Diagnosing the U.S. ‘national character’: Narcissistic Personality Disorder. Retrieved November 28, 2007, from http://www.altpr.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=632&mode=nocomments&order=0&thold=0

[3] Cullen, F., & Agnew, R. (2006). Criminological Theory: Past to Present (2nd ed.). New York: Roxbury Publishing Company, p. 380-382

Peaceful Protest in Chicago

First, the self-serving coverups, excuses, and propaganda coming from the various draconian Police Departments notwithstanding, The Occupation movement is a non-violent movement. As odd as it may sound, given their history, the Police in Chicago understand this. This was highlighted in a recent article by the Chicago Tribune

From an article written by Dawn Rhodes, Chicago Tribune reporter, this acute observation is pronounced,

"Violence has marred protests elsewhere. But here, police and marchers seem to be making a loud statement through nonviolence."

The violence she is referring to is the fearful police response elsewhere in the nation which has lead to pointless mass arrest, and serious injury. And, some ridiculous charges as "Improper use of a sidewalk" coming out of Dallas, Texas -- both my son and I mused about the kinky overtones in that charge.

So, why is Chicago handling the Occupation differently? From my distant vantage point, I can only speculate. However, my gut tells me that when all is said and done it come from three historic facts.

First, this generation of the Chicago Police Department does not want anything repeating the police riot of the 1968 Democratic Convention. That riot was egged on by the Democrats objecting to the protestors, and pressuring "The Boss" to do something about it. The end result was that the police were pressed to quell the protest. They lacked the tools and the training to deal with it. Today the CPD has the tools, and the training, but still prefer a professional route. That brings up the second reason.

Second, while the Occupation movement may be a pain to the officials of the city and the nation, it is essentially peaceful.

There have been two acts of petty property damage here in Chicago, and the Occupy Chicago movement has, to the best of my knowledge, made restitution for that damage -- like I said I am out in the fringes, so that may not be the case.

Since the protestors are committed to non-violence, it would be another unnecessary political black eye to Obama to to have the Chicago PD storm in as the State Police have in Oakland, and Berkly. The slander and hate speech of Fox News notwithstanding most people do understand that the police response is out of proportion to the Occupation Movement. Chicago is a city that works, and the police have taken a low key, "all in a day's work" non-personal approach to the Occupy message. That brings us to the next point.

Third, Chicago has a long history of protest, activism, and workers struggles. Most city dwellers are 99%-ers even if they do not join the movement. They understand the friction between the haves and have-nots. More important, many of the CPD officers grew up within the ongoing struggle. Their parents were part of that struggle. The officers know, deep within, that the Occupiers are speaking for them too.

While the rest of the nation is marred in heavy handed police violence, and citizen reprisal, One can hope that the community bond which exist here in the Great City of Chicago will hold while being tested in a time of change.

Watch the interview below for more information about Occupy Chicago.

Make a video - it's fun, easy and free!
www.onetruemedia.com

Polished

The arguments revisited, clean, and polished; media comes to watch, dismiss and abolish.

Connected to the corporate cast, they look down on the working class.

So chained the advertisement dollar, they refuse to admit to any future squalor.

They insist the American dream is fine, sanctioned, upheld and divine.

And this is how the report Wall Street News, rosy stories, and reviews.

Europe in crisis, Greece distressed, the upstanding Socialist state, crumbling due to Capitalist fate.

They bought Wall Street’s Dirty Lies, bought the fraud, bought the carney barker’s cries.

“Come one, come all, step right up, make a trillion, don’t be a chump.”

“Come on here, do it now, pull that trigger, take the vow, the money changers will show you how.”

“Take that first step on the path to magical wealth; make the journey towards financial health.”

Within each promising bundle of commercial paper, hid a filthy fraud, a marketing caper.

So long as most of the bundled notes were fine, the unserviceable debt sold as vintage wine.

“Put your name on the dotted line. Come on; trust us, in riches you will recline”

That is the story they continue to tell, that is the fable they continue to sell.

This is America all is well! No fraud, we promise, come fall under the golden spell.

Yet, on main street homes are lost. People into the gutter are tossed. No one noticed the hidden cost.

Bankers gamble with other’s money. Taking risk upon risk, they sucked up the worker’s honey.

For that is how they saw the masses, drones, surfs, dumb, stupid, assorted asses.

They still hold the real property, to sell again in a swirl of financial anarchy.

And laugh they do on all hollows’ eve, tricks played, treats withheld, as many more get the heave.