Simple Q:

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

http://labornotes.org/2012/02/chicago-occupation-challenges-corporate-school-agenda

This isn't terribly big news. But it does show that an occupation of space can lead to a positive result.

To be fair, I felt occupation was a silly tactic back in early September 2011. I've come around sense then.

Have you? Does this article mean anything to you? Does it make you think that maybe occupying spaces is a tactic that gets results?

Comments

[meowchica.livejournal.com]

http://occupyourhomes.org

is this not positive?

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

This is actually very negative, and rewards defaulting on contracts as opposed to rightful ownership.

If I don't pay my mortgage, what right do I have to the home I'm not paying for?

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

What gives someone the right to own land?

[telemann.livejournal.com]

THE 10th AMMENDMENT, BUSTER!!!11

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

lol

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

The common desire to not have to fight everyone else all the time over everything.

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

true!
but the people who dont have land agree to other people owning land because....?

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

Because they know that when they own land, they will need the same right.

[meowchica.livejournal.com]

You're simplifying the issue to just a bunch of people who didn't follow through with paying instead of including the factors that led to the foreclosures.

A lot of it wasn't their fault, and a lot of it wasn't legal.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

A lot of it wasn't their fault, and a lot of it wasn't legal.

I have my doubts. I'm certainly not taking their word for it, and the Occupy Homes lunatics have not really differentiated between legal and what they deem as illegal foreclosures.

[meowchica.livejournal.com]

lunatics is a strong word for people who are spending all of their time trying to help others - whether they're succeeding or not.

[dwer.livejournal.com]

Jeff isn't interested in people who aren't explicitly about law and order, especially when they're long-hair hippie types.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

More that I'm less interested in giving the government more power to solve issues the government created. Which, you know, is the exact opposite of "law and order types," so yeah.

[dwer.livejournal.com]

and that's related to this conversation how?

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Damned if I know. You're the one who tossed out the random nonsense about me, I had to correct the record. Again.

[dwer.livejournal.com]

lol

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

It's a strong word on purpose, though. They're, on a whole, not advocating for sane policies or advocating for reasonable things.

[dwer.livejournal.com]

yes! keeping kids in school? Why on earth would they advocate for a school to do such things???

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

You really think that this will keep kids out of school? Really? How?

[dwer.livejournal.com]

ah. You DIDN'T read the article. Noted.

[a-new-machine.livejournal.com]

How does what they're trying to do reflect on their mental faculties? I know folks who buy into that "Common Law/sovereign citizen" BS who think they're helping you when they tell you you don't have to pay taxes. Doesn't make them rational.

[meowchica.livejournal.com]

well I assumed he meant the lunacy of what they're doing, but you're correct that it means nothing as to whether or not they're actually crazy