Occupy Wall Street kitchen staff protesting fixing food for freeloaders

[Ban Hammer 13,516]

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/336206-kitchen-workers-at-ows-fed-uo-with-feeding-the-freeloaders/

Wow stereo simuposts!

good catch - duplicate topics have been merged.

[Misha & Ira 113]

This illustrates exactly why I do not want 'universal health care'. These people will get what they want and then could care less for the rest of us. They only want their organic chicken, spaghetti bolognese and luxuries for their elite selves...they claim to be the 99%...but really....in their hearts, they want only to be the 1% that rules the rest of us.

The reference to Animal Farm is exactly spot on. These people will foment rebellion and chaos until they sieze power for themselves and then will ruthlessly protect it once they have it....just as they have done everywhere.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

those wanting something for free complaining about someone wanting something for free

It is the BEST!

This can go down as the ultimate lesson in "Why capitalism works" They should just video this and use it for economics 101.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

[Karee 4,191]

They should call Sodexo. Sodexo does all the college cafes here so they are used to college students who can just swipe their student card and charge it to Mommy and Daddy.

At Alla's school they did a buffet with tons of choices for $7 per meal. What a deal! When she was astuden there she used to buy me a guest pass good for 5 meals and if she was late studying or something, Pasha and I would go there. Really good food.

They take care of all the Verizon cafeterias. Pretty good food.

[faust-yusov 103]

What is ironic is that it is this exact type of regrettable self-servitude that is the inexorable societal residue of ubiquitous capitalist mentality, and that which best exposes the extent of its odious and pernicious mechanics. Rather than undermining the arguments of the "occupiers", it's a fairly superb illustration of them: that we have crafted a society in which the selfish is rewarded and the selfless ignored, regardless of the disposition of the individual.

The noble choice to feed New York's huddled, hungry masses, as you all seem to sarcastically demand they should have, would have resulted fairly quickly in the crippling of resources and energy of both themselves and their capacity to voice their cause. You might as well begrudge the protestors that they have jobs - that they buy food for themselves and their families ahead of the starving and homeless.

This is the social climate we endure from birth. To survive within it is to facilitate it. Analogously: to oppose "death by firing squad", you need not hurl yourself headlong into the flurry of bullets - and that you choose not to ought not invalidate your beliefs.

No, what is genuinely amusing about this otherwise sad and (for now) irremediable situation, is that the only people with whom this story could possibly resonate are those who have misrepresented the ideology of the Occupy protesters so many times that they themselves now genuinely believe it to be about "wanting something for free".

The 'Animal Farm' analogy is hopeless. Not only because it would necessarily require that the protesters had the power to meet the increased food demand, but in that it misappropriates Orwell's entire message - videlicet: that established hierarchal institutions are prone to corruption in whatever capacity, and not that raillery or protest against them is in any way futile or nefarious.

One could make a reasonable argument, in fact, that the very point of 'Animal Farm' is that the only viable political system conceivable is one in a state of eternal convalescence. It is never invaluable to vocally and publicly dismantle the very foundations of society. Even if their political philosophy seems inimical to everything you value, it is that dutiful notion - ahead even of temporal concerns with capitalism - that drives the Occupy protests, and their adherents deserve better than to be smeared or dismissed at the slightest opportunity.

Edited October 30, 2011 by faust-yusov

[Danno 1,228]

What is ironic is that it is this exact type of regrettable self-servitude that is the inexorable societal residue of ubiquitous capitalist mentality, and that which best exposes the extent of its odious and pernicious mechanics. Rather than undermining the arguments of the "occupiers", it's a fairly superb illustration of them: that we have crafted a society in which the selfish is rewarded and the selfless ignored, regardless of the disposition of the individual.

The noble choice to feed New York's huddled, hungry masses, as you all seem to sarcastically demand they should have, would have resulted fairly quickly in the crippling of resources and energy of both themselves and their capacity to voice their cause. You might as well begrudge the protestors that they have jobs - that they buy food for themselves and their families ahead of the starving and homeless.

This is the social climate we endure from birth. To survive within it is to facilitate it. Analogously: to oppose "death by firing squad", you need not hurl yourself headlong into the flurry of bullets - and that you choose not to ought not invalidate your beliefs.

No, what is genuinely amusing about this otherwise sad and (for now) irremediable situation, is that the only people with whom this story could possibly resonate are those who have misrepresented the ideology of the Occupy protesters so many times that they themselves now genuinely believe it to be about "wanting something for free".

The 'Animal Farm' analogy is hopeless. Not only because it would necessarily require that the protesters had the power to meet the increased food demand, but in that it misappropriates Orwell's entire message - videlicet: that established hierarchal institutions are prone to corruption in whatever capacity, and not that raillery or protest against them is in any way futile or nefarious.

One could make a reasonable argument, in fact, that the very point of 'Animal Farm' is that the only viable political system conceivable is one in a state of eternal convalescence. It is never invaluable to vocally and publicly dismantle the very foundations of society. Even if their political philosophy seems inimical to everything you value, it is that dutiful notion - ahead even of temporal concerns with capitalism - that drives the Occupy protests, and their adherents deserve better than to be smeared or dismissed at the slightest opportunity.

Too many big words in that post for me.... can someone translate?

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

The 'Animal Farm' analogy is hopeless. Not only because it would necessarily require that the protesters had the power to meet the increased food demand, but in that it misappropriates Orwell's entire message - videlicet: that established hierarchal institutions are prone to corruption in whatever capacity, and not that raillery or protest against them is in any way futile or nefarious.

The greedy OWS movement has collected > US$500,000 and don't want to share.

Is that what you're so bitter about?

[faust-yusov 103]

Share with whom? What is your position? Are you suggesting that funds which might usefully be appropriated for effecting wider political change would be better distributed immediately among the nation's homeless, at a few cents a head?

I feel you're being knowingly facetious in an effort to avoid engaging with the movement's questions and ideology - arguing, it would seem, from a starting point of blind faith in capitalism, and refusing to take seriously any discourse which doesn't hold axiomatically to that belief.

Edited October 30, 2011 by faust-yusov

[Danno 1,228]

The greedy OWS movement has collected > US$500,000 and don't want to share.

Is that what you're so bitter about?

I know, it's rather stunning a mob which points it's fingers at others while accusing them of greed are in fact turning away the hungry in their midst.

Tsk Tsk Tsk.

[웃 910]

Too many big words in that post for me.... can someone translate?

Good luck with that. I'm still waiting for someone to translate his movie reviews:

'Tokyo Story'

As intimated in my previous post, critical reception of 'Still Walking' nudged me in the direction of Ozu's classic 'Tokyo Story', which I watched yesterday. It was indeed quite wonderful, fully deserving of all the accolades and plaudits, and much of what I said about 'Still Walking' applies - acutely observed, conveying of simmering emotion within the vérité constraints of inexorably polite discourse, and in its hints of tacit, personal tragedy, a moving humanistic picture.

Stylistically it is also an excellent example of early Japanese cinema traditions - notably the "face on" photography employed during conversation, a thoroughly apposite tack for such tersely drawn character interaction and drama.

'There Will Be Blood' (Anderson, 2007)

A disquisition on enterprise and ambition to rival Welles' 'Kane' and Herzog's 'Aguirre', and shone through a quintessentially American lens: the inexorable thrall of capitalism tussling with the opiate of organised religion. It's also absolutely wonderful cinema - from Elswit's cinematography to Greenwood's score, an immersive aesthetic triumph.

David Lynch's 'INLAND EMPIRE'.

A wonderful accomplishment, shot entirely on digital video, with a quite excellent lead performance from Laura Dern.

As far as one can objectively discern footholds in Lynchian narrative, it seems to further explore several tenets present in previous work - the demonic embodiment of sexual jealously, as seen in 'Lost Highway'; metafictitious elements sketched out from the pretext of a Hollywood production, cf. 'Mulholland Dr.'; a woman lost in a nightmarish labyrinthe of multiple consciousnesses and characters (again, 'Mulholland Dr.').

I must say - the more I see of his work, the more I am compelled to believe that Lynch is quite the master of oneiric surrealism. One of the greatest American filmmakers of his generation, no doubt.

'Still Walking', 2008, dir: Hirokazu Koreeda

A family reunites on a peaceful summer's day to mark the anniversary of its eldest son's death. It's a really lovely, tranquil film, with a wonderful, shrewdly observed minimalism to it – the drama scrupulously framed by those idiosyncratic, long-established boundaries of communication so characteristic of family. Its teasing out of deep-seated, simmering frictions from within those confines effects an enthralling laconicism and surmises a beautiful and accurate portrait.

'Aguirre, der Zorn Gottes [The Wrath of God]'

Herzog's world is full of portent, foreboding, inevitability, as the charismatic, self-aggrandising enigma, Aguirre, leads his band of Spanish rebels to expiration or murder in his futile and rabidly ambitious quest to find and conquer El Dorado.

Really captivating stuff - a treatise on the sacrifice of enterprise, with that air of fable and myth characteristic of the likes of Bergman and Tarkovsky.

'Offret', 1986, dir: Andrei Tarkovsky

(Spurred by watching 'Yumurta' a few weeks ago.)

Alexander, a troubled academic, commemorates his birthday with a gathering of family and friends at his home. Festivities of typical Tarkovskian portent ensue. Characters interact as if disparate entities in separate dreams. A metaphysical disquisition (an advocacy of the natural/spiritual over the material/empirical) is broadly outlined.

Dusk thereafter dulls the expansive and ornate wood-floored reception room to a thick murk more befitting its inhabitants' brood and quandaries. The monochrome flicker of a faltering television broadcast imparts the news that WW3 has been declared; that the Soviets are at war with America. So is sketched the familiar backdrop of impending nuclear holocaust; of thick, broiling apocalypse, so present and so well captured in so much of his work ('Ivan's Childhood', 'Stalker', 'Andrei Rublev').

A really wonderful film, and gorgeously photographed by Sven Nykvist, Ingmar Bergman's long time collaborator. A point on the ending, however: for a piece mostly consumed in a sort of groggy, meandering, oneiric existentialism, touching on the burdensome limitations of human intellect (a la 'Solaris'), its final climax did feel rather jarringly straight-forward... difficult to say whether this works to its favor or detriment after just one viewing.

Edited October 30, 2011 by Lord Infamous

[Danno 1,228]

Thats unreal, wonder what a "love letter" would look like from this guys pen?

[Fandango 1,440]

What is ironic is that it is this exact type of regrettable self-servitude that is the inexorable societal residue of ubiquitous capitalist mentality, and that which best exposes the extent of its odious and pernicious mechanics. Rather than undermining the arguments of the "occupiers", it's a fairly superb illustration of them: that we have crafted a society in which the selfish is rewarded and the selfless ignored, regardless of the disposition of the individual.

The noble choice to feed New York's huddled, hungry masses, as you all seem to sarcastically demand they should have, would have resulted fairly quickly in the crippling of resources and energy of both themselves and their capacity to voice their cause. You might as well begrudge the protestors that they have jobs - that they buy food for themselves and their families ahead of the starving and homeless.

This is the social climate we endure from birth. To survive within it is to facilitate it. Analogously: to oppose "death by firing squad", you need not hurl yourself headlong into the flurry of bullets - and that you choose not to ought not invalidate your beliefs.

No, what is genuinely amusing about this otherwise sad and (for now) irremediable situation, is that the only people with whom this story could possibly resonate are those who have misrepresented the ideology of the Occupy protesters so many times that they themselves now genuinely believe it to be about "wanting something for free".

The 'Animal Farm' analogy is hopeless. Not only because it would necessarily require that the protesters had the power to meet the increased food demand, but in that it misappropriates Orwell's entire message - videlicet: that established hierarchal institutions are prone to corruption in whatever capacity, and not that raillery or protest against them is in any way futile or nefarious.

One could make a reasonable argument, in fact, that the very point of 'Animal Farm' is that the only viable political system conceivable is one in a state of eternal convalescence. It is never invaluable to vocally and publicly dismantle the very foundations of society. Even if their political philosophy seems inimical to everything you value, it is that dutiful notion - ahead even of temporal concerns with capitalism - that drives the Occupy protests, and their adherents deserve better than to be smeared or dismissed at the slightest opportunity.

This made me lol. At least its an attempt at an explanation, first one I've seen amongst all the OWS supported I know.

But to try to make this about a sustenance issue and noble need for nutrition to carry on the good fight is really a stretch, but a for effort...

[MyLittlePony 340]

Obama has to fix the job problem fast or more protest will get worse all over the USA. I hate to see people beg for food and the people who give free food make the situation worse.

[mawilson 2,133]

The noble choice to feed New York's huddled, hungry masses, as you all seem to sarcastically demand they should have, would have resulted fairly quickly in the crippling of resources and energy of both themselves and their capacity to voice their cause.

You could say the same thing of the Wall Street "fat cats" - that the noble choice to pay more taxes or share their record profits with their employees would have resulted in the crippling of their capacity to buy private jets, multimillion dollar homes, rare art and pricey jewelry.