deviant art

Deviant Login Shop  Join deviantART for FREE Take the Tour
Group Info Group Founded 1 Year ago Statistics 577 Members
12,502 Pageviews565 Watchers

Favourites

We'd like to thank the following artists.

Deviants

Group Info

Our group promotes and displays current art, photos and news from or about the Occupy movement. Come join us.
Group
Founded 1 Year ago
Nov 19, 2011

Location
Global

Group Focus
Support & Cause

577 Members
565 Watchers
12,502 Pageviews
Daily Pageviews

Admins

Founder


:iconpoasterchild:

Co-Founders


:icongonzoville::iconjimfleming::iconpeck317::iconparty9999999::iconfennecc::iconlost-capella::iconmiss-tbones::iconjuiceboxxjuss::icondanneamu::iconacrylles::iconlaresistance::iconflockhart::iconxantipa2::iconsketchoo::iconproctorlefebvre::iconbogieharmond::iconcrazywulf:

Affiliates

We welcome all affiliates,
even those we don't fully agree with...
Occupy is primarily about economic and social-political justice.

:iconlightworkers::iconworldevents::iconda-symposium::iconfemen::iconfoodloverz::icontelecomixda::iconbritishcomedy::iconmilleniumart5::iconanon-laboratories::iconpirateparty-da::iconrevolution-writers::icona-d-aclub::icontrotsky-fans::iconwritersofnewage::icongive-llamageta-llama::iconone-world-united::iconpeople-and-bodyparts::iconunconventionallove::iconstop-sopa-group::icongroup-against-acta::iconstop-sopa::iconexpectus::iconspanishrevolution::iconwonderful-world::iconwriters--club::icongbsta::iconwhatsurroundsus::iconthe-big-cats-club::iconcommunism::iconskyandnatureclub:

Twitter

Please Post your Mind

The opposite for courage is not cowardice, it is conformity. Even a dead fish can go with the flow.
Jim Hightower

I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies.
-Thomas Jefferson

Change does not roll in on the wheels of inevitability, but comes through continuous struggle. And so we must straighten our backs and work for our freedom. A man can't ride you unless your back is bent.
-Martin Luther King, Jr.

I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.
Thomas Jefferson

How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!

Samuel Adams


Video: How Reaganomics Destroyed The Middle Class :thumb335925827:


Occupyartists on blogspot [link]



click to view video



Freedom of expression enables democracy to work and allows us to participate in decision-making. We cannot exercise our right to vote very well if we don't have free access to ideas or able to express our views freely. Violations of freedom of expression usually bring with it violations of freedom of association and freedom of assembly.

We must Question! We must Speak Out!!!


Click Thumbs for Videos


Cornel West-Why Support Occupy
---------------------------------------------


------------------------------------------------
Adbusters: [link]

Sojourners [link]

Recent Journal Entries

by David Stockman, Author of 'The Great Deformation: The Corruption of Capitalism in America'

( Yes, believe it or not,  this is the same David Alan Stockman the U.S. politician and businessman, who serving as a Republican U.S. Representative from the state of Michigan (1977–1981) and was the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (1981–1985) within the Reagan Administration.

The Arrogance of Wall Street: Crony Capitalism, John Mack Style
Posted: 04/08/2013 5:16 pm

The urgent imperative for the Fed to revert to canons of sound money can be illustrated by its opposite: the utterly shameful and gratuitous bailout of Morgan Stanley two weeks after the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy. On September 29, 2008, Morgan Stanley was insolvent and belonged in the financial morgue on a slab alongside Lehman.

Yet that very day it reported to the public that it had "strong capital and liquidity positions." That statement was utterly misleading, but it never gave rise to an SEC investigation because it could be defended by means of a hair-splitting technicality. A later investigation by the Federal Crisis Inquiry Commission, in fact, showed that Morgan Stanley had $99 billion of liquidity on the date in question. What the investigation also showed, however, was that very same day it had been the recipient of $107 billion in liquidity injections from the Fed's alphabet soup of bailout programs. It was liquid only because it had become a branch office of the New York Fed!

Absent the cash being injected by the Fed's multiple and massive fire hoses, Morgan Stanley would have been deeply illiquid. Its hot-money lenders would have seized tens of billions in collateral, which they would have sold at any loss necessary to retrieve their cash. Lehman's reputed $40 billion loss at the time of its filing would have paled compared to the losses which would have been ripped from Morgan Stanley's tottering $1 trillion balance sheet.

Yet the survival of Morgan Stanley was of no moment to the American economy. It was a giant leveraged hedge fund being subjected to the mother of all margin calls; that is, its reckless reliance on overnight wholesale money to fund massive amounts of impaired, illiquid, and highly volatile assets was undergoing a flaming crash landing.

The claim that its vestigial capabilities in the mergers and acquisitions arena and in underwriting stocks and bonds needed to be preserved was ludicrous. Neither of these businesses required meaningful amounts of capital, and there were always dozens of pedigreed Wall Street veterans waiting to hang out a boutique investment banking shingle to pick up the slack.

Even though no public purpose was served, the details of the Fed's $107 billion bailout of Morgan Stanley underscore the abject manner in which it had capitulated to the imperatives of crony capitalism.

In this episode lies proof of the lasting damage wrought by the bailouts of Wall Street. Morgan Stanley's CEO and chairman, John Mack, was a ruthless gambler and bully who had never hesitated to exploit any available avenue to make a buck, to say nothing of a billion bucks. In the run-up to the crisis, Morgan Stanley had embraced any and all short sale trades that could potentially yield a profit, including a giant short of the housing market which blew up and ended up costing Morgan Stanley a $9 billion write-off.

But after Mr. Market dispatched Lehman Brothers and then Merrill Lynch, the short sellers had turned their sights on Morgan Stanley. It was by then apparent that its wholesale funding was rapidly vanishing, and it would be forced to take massive losses on the junk assets which had accumulated on its balance sheet over years and years of bubble prosperity on Wall Street.

Yet in less than a New York minute, Mack had reversed course and stormed the barricades on Capitol Hill and the White House, demanding an SEC ban on short selling of his stock and that of the other banks and financial institutions. On Tuesday afternoon, September 16, for example, the treasury secretary, Hank Paulson, according to his memoirs, "got an earful from John Mack . . . the short sellers were after his bank. His cash reserves were evaporating."

Crony capitalism had now reached its apotheosis: one insuperably arrogant prince of Wall Street was commanding his former chief rival, and now occupant of the highest financial policy job of the land, to pull any and all stops to save his firm. From what? The answer was, to save it from its own clients. In fact, prime brokerage customers and trading counterparties were withdrawing their deposits and margin accounts at a furious pace because they knew full well that, like Lehman and Bear Stearns, Morgan Stanley was a house of cards.

The idea that the short sellers were draining Morgan Stanley's cash was a complete canard. Creditors and lenders to Morgan Stanley were fleeing, which would force a fire sale liquidation of impaired assets and thereby render the firm insolvent. Short sellers were furiously attacking the carcass because they knew the firm was finished, brought down by the foolish leverage and hot-money wholesale funding from which it had harvested so much ill-gotten profit in the past.

What the short sellers hadn't reckoned with, however, was the final triumph of crony capitalism. Morgan Stanley was spared because Goldman wanted it rescued. In a phone call to Paulson during the heat of the crisis that day, Goldman's current CEO, Lloyd Blankfein, had left no doubt about the stakes. As the tone-deaf Paulson actually confessed in his own memoirs, he had used the great powers of his office to save Goldman Sachs: "Lloyd was afraid that if something wasn't done, Morgan Stanley would fail . . . And even though Goldman had plenty of liquidity and cash, it could be next."

So within hours of Mack's presumptuous tantrum and with virtually no analysis or due process, the US government met his demands. Chris Cox, the former congressman and purported free market true believer who George W. Bush had chosen to head the SEC, issued a truly pitiful announcement. In it he explained to American citizens that for the next fifteen days they would be free to buy financial company stocks, but not to sell them.

The short-selling ban was the product of naked Wall Street aggression, and in the case of Morgan Stanley there could be no doubt as to the true purpose. The Morgan Stanley stock had dropped from $80 per share to $40 on the eve of the crisis, had fallen to $20 upon the Lehman filing, and by the end of September was at $7 and sinking fast.

Thus, in the final weeks of September leading to the fateful October 3 approval of TARP, Washington's action was being driven by an overriding Wall Street imperative; namely, saving the stock price of Morgan Stanley-- and those of Goldman, JPMorgan, Bank of America, and Citigroup, too-- from the fate of Lehman Brothers, and assuring that the personal wealth of John Mack and the remaining Wall Street titans would remain intact.

Within a fortnight, of course, the danger had already passed. Armed with gifts that only the sovereign state can bestow--a ban on short selling of its stock and $100 billion of cash based on junk collateral--Morgan Stanley evaded Mr. Market's wrathful attack and not only remained open for business, but saw its stock price recover smartly. By the end of the year it had tripled, and within twelve months had risen fivefold from the time of its bailouts.

Nor was Morgan Stanley given special rank in the hierarchy of Washington's bailout dispensations. From the same liquidity fire hoses which powered cash into Morgan Stanley, nearly the identical amount went to Citigroup at $100 billion, Bank of America at $91 billion, Goldman Sachs at $80 billion, and nearly equal amounts to the leading banks of Europe. All told, the Fed dispensed nearly $700 billion in emergency loans during the last months of 2008, doubling down on the appropriated money provided by TARP.

At the end of the day, this trillion-dollar infusion of capital and liquidity from the public till had a single overarching effect: it nullified in its entirety the impact of Mr. Market's withdrawal of a similar magnitude of funding from the wholesale money market. So the very monetary distortion--the availability of cheap overnight funding in massive quantities--upon which the Wall Street financial bubble had been built had now been recreated at the lending windows of the Fed, FDIC, and the US Treasury.

The opposite path of liquidating the Wall Street bubble was eschewed, of course, not only because it would have meant massive losses to speculators in the stock and bonds of Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, JPMorgan, and the remaining phalanx of the walking wounded. Crony capitalism also triumphed because in muscling the system during the white heat of crisis, Wall Street had plenty of intellectual cover. The fact is, mainstream economists of both parties were trapped in a Keynesian dead end, proclaiming that the solution to the crushing national debt load which had actually triggered the financial crisis was to pile on more of the same.

Accordingly, banks which were "too big to fail" couldn't be busted up, since they were allegedly needed to shovel more credit onto already debt-saturated household and business balance sheets. Likewise, speculators who should have suffered epochal losses during the meltdown were resuscitated by Fed-engineered zero interest rates in the money market, thereby quickly reviving the same massively leveraged "carry trades" in commodities, currencies, equities, derivatives, and other risk assets which had brought on the crisis in the first place.

This an excerpt from David Stockman's new book, THE GREAT DEFORMATION: The Corruption of Capitalism in America, published today by PublicAffairs.


from the Huffington Post [link]
Occupy Wall Street, in solidarity with the people of the world, envisions a free, democratic and just society built on the following principles:

LIBERTY: whereby we secure the full spectrum of human rights – political, civil, economic, social and cultural — against violation or infringement, particularly by unchecked corporate power and unjust governments; where we ensure unrestricted public access to common spaces and other resources, using free and open technologies to promote the free flow of ideas and information.;

PEOPLE POWER: whereby everyone’s voice is heard, and no one is marginalized; where decision-making, in every form and at every level, exists by the will of the people, and neither wealth nor history alone will justify power;

PEOPLE BEFORE PROFIT: whereby we value human dignity and needs over monetary gain, elevating them to a place of primary importance; among these are the rights to meaningful and/or fairly-rewarded work; a decent home; abundant sources of clean air, pure water and natural, nutritious food supplies; and free, comprehensive healthcare and education;

FAIRNESS: whereby we call on all who enjoy society’s benefits to accept their share of society’s responsibilities; where everyone has an equal opportunity to thrive and power is shared equitably by all so that no one is allowed to exploit, oppress or enslave another;

EQUALITY: whereby we reject all forms of individual, systemic and institutionalized discrimination and oppression, on any basis, including but not limited to race, age, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, religion, national origin, nationality, ethnicity or economic standing;

JUSTICE: whereby transparent and accountable social, political, legal and economic systems work to benefit all, not just a privileged few; these systems are restructured or replaced when they fail to do so;

ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP: whereby the wealth of our economy emerges from the health of our environment, and therefore all societal activities are conducted with respect, humane treatment and foresight to ensure that all life is sustainable and that the natural world has room to flourish, now and for future generations;

PEACE: whereby non-violence is aspired to as a way of life, and we resolve to live together in harmony and celebrate principles of compassion, appreciation and respect for diversity and differing views;

“ANOTHER WORLD IS POSSIBLE”

We invite you to join us; starting right here, right now. We are taking it directly to the people; opening new conversations of truth, enthusiasm and optimism.
More Journal Entries

Comments


Add a Comment:
 
:iconapocapus:
Hi, I need help.

This petition will fail if we don't get more people signing it.

This is the petition to force congress to wear sponsored patches so that everyone can see who their donors are.

[link]
Reply
:iconnakt-hag:
*NAKT-HAG Feb 25, 2013  Professional General Artist
Many thanks for acceptance into the group!
Reply
:icontyler9862:
~tyler9862 Dec 15, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
I'm sick of being nice:

:iconpoasterchild: is an awful trolling individual who does not stand for occupy at all. He uses it as a disguise to pass his art through that really isn't art at all. I'm sick of it.
Reply
:icondarkumah:
Mood: Love ~DarkUmah Nov 23, 2012  Student General Artist
Thank you for inviting me to your group :)
Reply
:iconflipswitchmandering:
Hey, I just wanted everyone here to know this week is "Opt Out Week"

I apologize if this appears to be spam, but it is about the movement, not the website.

Check InfoWars.com for what opt out week is.

I have nothing to do with infowars, im just helping spread the message of what bastards the TSA are, and what they reall stand for.
Reply
:iconteslacron:
~Teslacron Nov 9, 2012  Professional Artist
Apologies Poasterchild, that comment was not meant to be offensive, I will refrain from additional correspondance.

v/r

- Tes
Reply
:iconzucca-xerfantes:
*Zucca-Xerfantes Oct 17, 2012  Hobbyist Writer
I would like to register a complaint to you folks about [link] and something that I think you all would disapprove of.

I posted a negative comment on one of his images to express my viewpoint and my right to free speech and I was a little bitey about it, but I never used... what's the buzzword...? Ah yes, I did not use hate-speech of any sort.

Here is his response to my comment:

Ah, an Ayn Randian.

Folks, this person ascribes to a "philosophy" penned by a second-rate novelist who, in her old age, sick with cancer and abandoned by the rich patrons who had lionized her just a short time before, she had her law firm retain a social worker who privately applied for Medicare and Social Security in Miss Rand's maiden name. Her applications were approved, and used the money to pay substantial medical bills and to survive. They don't want you to know that, and neither does their current champion, Paul Ryan, who requires that all new hires in his Congressional offices read Ayn Rand's pap an pablum.

You'll also notice the provocative ad hominem attack. It's what these right-wingers excel at. Well, asshole, you can't Swiftboat this one. People -- like Mitt Romney's dad [link] -- see your morally and politically bankrupt "philosophy" for what it is: protective coloration for unalloyed greed. So, kindly bugger off, eh?


And here is my response. He blocked me from responding, so would you pass this along to him please?

Good gravy, I had no idea that you had the ability to read minds! Why, suddenly you know everything about me! Suddenly you know my background!

Oh wait...

No, you don't know jack about me.

Permit me to assuage the many questions you're no doubt asking about me...

Firstly, I'm not a Randian. I do not believe in absolutes. Anarchy is just as filthy and destructive an ideal as fascism. See, unlike Rand, I do not believe that total lack of regulation for businesses will lead to good times for all. The minimum wage I believe is a good thing because it adjusts to take into consideration the cost of living in any given state. I do believe that *overregulation* leads to disaster for businesses both large and small and I do not hold to the Far Right's notion of no regs and the Far Left's notion of full regs.

Secondly, I think that you are being quite unfair to Rand(Which is funny, since [I'm assuming you're a Democrat] your side touts itself as being the only fair side) because her life, as you stated, was at stake. Is not a person allowed to change their mind on something they so strongly believe in? John Kerry was for the war on terror before he was against it.

Thirdly, your blocking me is an act of cowardice and indicative of why I do not trust far Leftists who supress free speech.

Fourth matter, you put words in Romney's father's mouth, but need I remind you, that Mitt Romney gave away his inheritance to make his own wealth by his own hand. I would have thought that someone (I'm assuming here) like you would be very, VERY pleased with this move. Your side has made it clear that you disapprove of fortunes passing down, unearned, to offspring.

I debate with many Liberals and sometimes even Conservatives and even if they say things that piss me off, I *NEVER* block them because suppressing speech is a dangerous habit to get into.

Do you wish to have a conversation like adults, or is your ideal so fragile that you will you use the mechanics of the site to shield that frail ideal like an angry child who claps their hands over their head and hollers 'lalalala' to prevent the other side from being heard?

I'm no more Randian than you are. And frankly, I am offended that you assumed such specificity about me without knowing a thing about me. This does not bode well for your side on any sort of debate front.

Why do you feel you need to shut me up? Because I believe differently than you?

I'm not even Republican, I'm Libertarian. Now who's the unfair one?



Thank you for hearing me out, Occupy. I have formally voiced my complaint against him and that, in addition to giving the response intended, is all I came to do.
Reply
:icontyler9862:
~tyler9862 Oct 22, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Dear Zucca,

Recently we have noticed these issues and there have been instances with my own account and his while also highlighting other issues between a huge contributor to this group.

It appears that it is true, he can care less about another's opinion and says that in his policy. This leaves him closed minded and offers no personal growth. It also limits personal freedoms and grows them to.

While yes you are limited from questioning, he sadly has the right to ignore your ideas because that is his/her freedom. If that individual does so then he/ she is as ignorant as who they mock but that is a choice.

If you want to make a statement then express your own opinion through your own poster or art. If done correctly you make a statement while having everything copyrighted and it does not go against the policy.

If the submission is not accepted or removed without explanation. Contact either me or crazy wolf and we can resolve the conflict.

Internet and occupy means freedom for all, not the creator of the group. If this issue persists that his choice but if it affects the groups, matters will be taken.

Hope this helps,

Regards, tyler9862
Reply
:iconcrazywulf:
~Crazywulf Oct 25, 2012  Student General Artist
Oh yeah... if anyone removes a comment or art work with out any good cause please contact us... I have to apologize, being that I and a few others have very much neglected this group recently, but since I started the group I need to take on full blame. sorry :boogie:
Reply
:iconzucca-xerfantes:
*Zucca-Xerfantes Oct 23, 2012  Hobbyist Writer
It does help. Thank you for addressing this manner to the height of your capacity.

I do wish to engage in the free exchange of ideas rather than quashing other opinions.

To assume these values are simply malleable to the moment only reduces the credibility of the one doing it.

As far as freedom of speech goes, as far as I'm concerned, it's all or nothing.
Reply
Add a Comment: