# Occupy 2nd Wave - May



## ska invita (Apr 13, 2012)

Supposedly there are public plans for a 2nd Wave of Occupy in May. Also the UKUNCUT street party thing is at the end of May.

Doesn't seem to be that much momentum at the moment in the UK towards these, but it may build.

Dates so far announced are May Day, 12 May and 15 May. I think (may be wrong) Tuesday 15 May is the global day of action called by the Spanish (might be the 12th though) - possibly both will see co-ordinated actions in different countries.

UKUncut thing is the 26th May...I think http://www.ukuncut.org.uk/blog/PR-great-british-street-parties

Thats all I know...


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Apr 17, 2012)

well at least it will be warmer this time


----------



## Red Storm (Apr 17, 2012)

Oooo I can't wait...


----------



## xes (Apr 17, 2012)

good news


----------



## AKA pseudonym (Apr 17, 2012)

No confirmed details as yet... Belfast are meeting tonight about it ( c/f Belfast thread)
Hopefully this will be the first co-ordinated campaign across Ireland/UK.....

btw: I wouldnt necessarily define it as a 'second wave' quite a few camps have held strong....


----------



## rekil (Apr 21, 2012)

They've started early here with a broke landlord solidarity campaign.


> Members of the Occupy Dame Street protest movement have travelled to the former Dublin home of Brendan and Asta Kelly to pledge support for the couple.
> 
> Qualified accountant Mr Kelly, 71, and his wife Asta were filmed as sheriffs escorted them from the plush property in St Matthias Wood, Killiney on Wednesday.
> 
> ...


G-d bless us and save us.


----------



## ska invita (May 2, 2012)

Bit of info up for May 12
http://occupylsx.org/?p=4044
May 15th
http://occupylsx.org/?p=4082


----------



## hipipol (May 5, 2012)

The First wave is still camped out on Finsbury Sq. Went down thery to see if I could get a first hand idea of whats happening
Well mainly arguments about food - to be fair living hand to mouth in a mud bath will drain your resolve
A girl came by on a pushbike saying there was to be a meet there the next day as she represented the Occupy Energy group - no one at the site had heard of her or the meet, well of the 5 people in the receprion tent that is.
The tent doubles as a library
Lots of Jackie Collins type stuff
Very odd


----------



## shaman75 (May 11, 2012)

someone stuck up a manifesto/ list of demands on the guardian.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/may/11/occupy-globalmay-manifesto

protest tomorrow, 1pm at St Pauls.


----------



## kavenism (May 11, 2012)

"Food sovereignty through sustainable farming should be promoted as an instrument of food security for the benefit of all. This should include an indefinite moratorium on the production and marketing of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and immediate reduction of agrochemicals use."

Bang goes all research into new treatments for cancer, HIV, and a whole host of other diseases which are treated using drugs produced using modified mammalian cells. Oh and I lose my job too! Well thought out that one.


----------



## elfman (May 12, 2012)

Occupy confuses me.


----------



## yield (May 12, 2012)

How so? It's about reclaiming the commons. Not stopping useful research.


----------



## kavenism (May 12, 2012)

yield said:


> How so? It's about reclaiming the commons. Not stopping useful research.


 
They say explicitly that they want a moratorium on the production of ALL new GMO's. They make no distinction between those used to produced medical insulin and modified crops. Although I'm sure they're more opposed to the latter. Just indicates to me that they're not thinking things through. And besides I'm not convinced that the opposition against modified crops isn't just white middle class hippy bullshit which takes no account of the possible benefits that these crops may have in parts of the world where the growing of cereals is subject to contingencies that we simply don't have to face.


----------



## butchersapron (May 12, 2012)

I think what they say that they want is irrelevant - the fact that there is no process that has decided this for me/us is more fuckwitted.


----------



## Col_Buendia (May 12, 2012)

copliker said:


> They've started early here with a broke landlord solidarity campaign.
> 
> 
> > _“It doesn’t matter how many properties they have in their portfolio,” said Mr Rogers._
> ...


Am I missing something here or have the Dubs mastered a level of irony previously unseen in history?


----------



## Riklet (May 12, 2012)

It's the anniversary of the 15M "Democracia Real Ya" movement in Spain.  There's been solitary actions in various countries, including the UK, Germany etc, and lots of places across Spain today, with more set to start/continue tonight.  Spanish news story translated here.

Most of the main demonstrations and attempts to occupy have kicked off today, but the demo here is at 19:00 etc due to heat and other factors.  They've chosen the 12th instead of the 15th as it's the weekend and better for numbers etc.  

The Spanish government has been very clear that camping out is not allowed (which has been criticised by Amnesty), the police have shut down a squat and a CSOA (Centro Social Okupado Autogestionado) centre and I think there's a big police presence out n about across the country.  There definitely will be in Barcelona n Madrid anyway, will update later probably, off out to see what's happening now.


----------



## shaman75 (May 12, 2012)




----------



## AKA pseudonym (May 12, 2012)

im hearing they is getting kettled?


----------



## shaman75 (May 12, 2012)

I stayed with it until they gathered outside the BoE.  Police tried kettling a few times during the journey there, but they kept pushing together on a countdown and breaking though.  Police lines ended up surrounded and withdrew.  Twitter reporting dispersal notice given, but seems like they were gong to resist.  Or just move elsewhere and keep going.  Back home processing pics atm.


----------



## Artaxerxes (May 12, 2012)

shaman75 said:


> I stayed with it until they gathered outside the BoE. Police tried kettling a few times during the journey there, but they kept pushing together on a countdown and breaking though. Police lines ended up surrounded and withdrew. Twitter reporting dispersal notice given, but seems like they were gong to resist. Or just move elsewhere and keep going. Back home processing pics atm.


 
Pretty much the same here, looked like most people wandered off when it got to the BoE as well. Did the riot squad moving up onto the steps ever make any sense in the end?

edit: Some photos uploaded, didnt seem to get many I'm happy with.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/59462388@N00/tags/occupy/


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 12, 2012)

kavenism said:


> "Food sovereignty through sustainable farming should be promoted as an instrument of food security for the benefit of all. This should include an indefinite moratorium on the production and marketing of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and immediate reduction of agrochemicals use."
> 
> Bang goes all research into new treatments for cancer, HIV, and a whole host of other diseases which are treated using drugs produced using modified mammalian cells. Oh and I lose my job too! Well thought out that one.


 
You're being disingenuous. The "manifesto" refers strictly to sustainable farming", and makes no mention of the use of genetic modification techniques in other fields than agriculture.
Don't accuse others of not thinking things out when you either haven't done so yourelf, or are constructing a straw man around which you can argue that you'd prefer not to lose your job.


----------



## shaman75 (May 12, 2012)

seems like riot police are wading in and generally being 'orrible.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 12, 2012)

kavenism said:


> They say explicitly that they want a moratorium on the production of ALL new GMO's.


 
Yes, they do.

Now, in what *context* do they do so? 



> They make no distinction between those used to produced medical insulin and modified crops.


 
WHy would you need to make a distinction when it's clear that your context is agriculture, not "everything"?



> Although I'm sure they're more opposed to the latter. Just indicates to me that they're not thinking things through. And besides I'm not convinced that the opposition against modified crops isn't just white middle class hippy bullshit which takes no account of the possible benefits that these crops may have in parts of the world where the growing of cereals is subject to contingencies that we simply don't have to face.


 
You might have a point if we didn't already have a fair idea of the cost/benefit ratios of current GM agriculture. They look great for the companies that own the seedlines, especially on the balance sheet. Not so cool for the farmers, though, who are not permitted to "bank" seeds, and a real arse for some of the farmers who've been sued by the big seed companies because wind-drift has blown seed from neighbouring farms onto their land, and "agents" from the likes of Monsanto and Cargill have spotted "their" crop growing on a farm that doesn't have a licence to grow it. I won't even bother to trot out the "Golden Rice" debacle beyond mentioning it.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 12, 2012)

shaman75 said:


> seems like riot police are wading in and generally being 'orrible.


 
So, behaving like coppers, then?


----------



## shaman75 (May 12, 2012)

"Police losing control attacking protesters, press and legal observers"

https://twitter.com/#!/Henry_Langston/status/201371392078397440


----------



## ska invita (May 12, 2012)

Live stream? I think it was streaming at the time - some kind of video anyway
http://bambuser.com/v/2637215


----------



## shaman75 (May 12, 2012)

on bbc news 24 now.  good interviewee for a change.


----------



## kavenism (May 12, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> You're being disingenuous. The "manifesto" refers strictly to sustainable farming", and makes no mention of the use of genetic modification techniques in other fields than agriculture.
> Don't accuse others of not thinking things out when you either haven't done so yourelf, or are constructing a straw man around which you can argue that you'd prefer not to lose your job.


 

Fair enough; although the arguments I've heard against the use of modified crops seem to me to have little validity (aside from the lack of democratic control over their use), and more then a hint of crude luddism, which could just as well be applied to other uses of GMOs.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 12, 2012)

kavenism said:


> Fair enough; although the arguments I've heard against the use of modified crops seem to me to have little validity (aside from the lack of democratic control over their use), and more then a hint of crude luddism, which could just as well be applied to other uses of GMOs.


 
Well, I suppose the more nuanced argument (and to be honest, biotech was a new field when I studied biology) is that medical research is in conformity with quite a few more safeguards, and "exposure" to GM medicines is limited to those who require such novel creations, whereas the average GM crop of the 1990s was fairly poorly-controlled in terms of limiting the various routes by which the GM lines could cross into the general population. For all the boasting about sterility and the impossibility of cross-fertilisation, for example, we know that some "terminator" lines of seeds *didn't* terminate, and cross-bred with other strains. All in all, I suspect that Luddism (Hail Ned!) is less of an issue than public concerns (some well-informed, some poorly-informed) about possible environmental consequences, and the blithe disregard that the politicians and Big Farma (see what I did there?  ) showed those public concerns when the technology was new still go a long way in informing reaction to the idea of agricultural GMOs.


----------



## ymu (May 12, 2012)

kavenism said:


> Fair enough; although the arguments I've heard against the use of modified crops seem to me to have little validity (aside from the lack of democratic control over their use), and more then a hint of crude luddism, which could just as well be applied to other uses of GMOs.


The behaviour of the GMO seed companies is kinda critical to the arguments, no? My dad was a farmer and he used to have a field for growing seed rather than buy it each year. The cost difference to a small farmer is huge because family labour comes free (big farming conglomerates are better off paying a seed company than they are paying people to pull out the weeds by hand). The benefit of GM crops to small farmers is very, very limited when every penny of any advantage gained will be reflected in the price of the seed to the farmers. It's really very naive to argue that these companies are doing something which benefits small farmers - they're not charities.

The other problem is the idea that GMO is a single technology. Proving one particular GMO safe/unsafe tells you nothing at all about the others. Even if it is credible to assume that you can prove anything at all about an agricultural GMO without far more extensive and long-term field trials than the ones they are required to carry out.

But, as butcher's said, of far more concern is how this hippy crap got released by a bunch of facile morons on behalf of everyone else.


----------



## kavenism (May 12, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Well, I suppose the more nuanced argument (and to be honest, biotech was a new field when I studied biology) is that medical research is in conformity with quite a few more safeguards, and "exposure" to GM medicines is limited to those who require such novel creations, whereas the average GM crop of the 1990s was fairly poorly-controlled in terms of limiting the various routes by which the GM lines could cross into the general population. For all the boasting about sterility and the impossibility of cross-fertilisation, for example, we know that some "terminator" lines of seeds *didn't* terminate, and cross-bred with other strains. All in all, I suspect that Luddism (Hail Ned!) is less of an issue than public concerns (some well-informed, some poorly-informed) about possible environmental consequences, and the blithe disregard that the politicians and Big Farma (see what I did there?  ) showed those public concerns when the technology was new still go a long way in informing reaction to the idea of agricultural GMOs.


 

Yeah I think the lack of regulatory control would be my main concern. The standards and safeguards for use of engineered crops are nothing compared to what you have for use of pharmaceuticals. I don’t think there is even a recognised standard of quality assurance for the trial usage of such things like there is for use of new drugs. The FDA once burnt a load of Wilhelm Reich’s orgone books in the US, can’t see them ever taking such a hard line against these big agro companies and torching a few crops that fail to meet standards. Safeguards against cross contamination for active pharmaceutical ingredients is number 1 on any auditors list when they come to my place, but for these crops it seems like they’re happy to just hope the wind doesn’t blow too hard and spread the stuff around! Still I’m not against them in principle.


----------



## kavenism (May 12, 2012)

ymu said:


> The behaviour of the GMO seed companies is kinda critical to the arguments, no? My dad was a farmer and he used to have a field for growing seed rather than buy it each year. The cost difference to a small farmer is huge because family labour comes free (big farming conglomerates are better off paying a seed company than they are paying people to pull out the weeds by hand). The benefit of GM crops to small farmers is very, very limited when every penny of any advantage gained will be reflected in the price of the seed to the farmers. It's really very naive to argue that these companies are doing something which benefits small farmers - they're not charities.
> 
> The other problem is the idea that GMO is a single technology. Proving one particular GMO safe/unsafe tells you nothing at all about the others. Even if it is credible to assume that you can prove anything at all about an agricultural GMO without far more extensive and long-term field trials than the ones they are required to carry out.
> 
> But, as butcher's said, of far more concern is how this hippy crap got released by a bunch of facile morons on behalf of everyone else.


 

I can agree with all of that. But surely this is an argument against the economics of the industry rather than the science involved? We all know big pharma is down in Judas Pit in terms of ethics, but is it not conceivable that under a different set of economic imperatives and proper oversight it could be a force for good all the way down?


----------



## shaman75 (May 12, 2012)

spain makes it look like a massive joke


----------



## ymu (May 12, 2012)

kavenism said:


> I can agree with all of that. But surely this is an argument against the economics of the industry rather than the science involved? We all know big pharma is down in Judas Pit in terms of ethics, but is it not conceivable that under a different set of economic imperatives and proper oversight it could be a force for good all the way down?


Trouble is, we live in an all too real world. You can't argue that they'd be an excellent innovation if only we lived in a different time and place.

It's much the same as people arguing we can't criticise the police because we need them to investigate crime. It misses the point spectacularly. And it's supposed to. A coherent argument would conclude that some things are too important to society as a whole to allow such conflicts of interest to arise. You can't just park the problem of capitalism in order to defend the industry when the problem stems precisely from the fact that they are rewarded on the basis of blind profit, and not on the amount of value they create for society as a whole.


----------



## kavenism (May 12, 2012)

ymu said:


> Trouble is, we live in an all too real world. You can't argue that they'd be an excellent innovation if only we lived in a different time and place.
> 
> It's much the same as people arguing we can't criticise the police because we need them to investigate crime. It misses the point spectacularly. And it's supposed to. A coherent argument would conclude that some things are too important to society as a whole to allow such conflicts of interest to arise. You can't just park the problem of capitalism in order to defend the industry when the problem stems precisely from the fact that they are rewarded on the basis of blind profit, and not on the amount of value they create for society as a whole.


 

I’m not clear what position you’re taking here. Are you claiming that there is no way for life saving drugs to be produced without evoking some capitalist monolith that would inevitably corrupt all the good inherent in curing disease? I don’t think the comparison the police holds any water. They are corrupt by function, which is the protection of private property in a class society, I don’t see the corruption of big pharma emanating from the function of producing products that treat illnesses. Are you seriously suggesting that you would do away with all the progress that has been made through the mass availability of pharmaceuticals over the last 100 years, and you can provide a convincing argument that the overall welfare of humanity would be better for that? Shouldn't the argument rather be that the re-organisation of production on a non-profit basis along with putting availability on an egalitarian footing would solve many of the problems?


----------



## treelover (May 12, 2012)

shaman75 said:


> spain makes it look like a massive joke


 
250,000 and growing tonight in Barecelona, youth unemployment is terrible here in the UK, but no real reaction...

why?


----------



## ymu (May 12, 2012)

kavenism said:


> I’m not clear what position you’re taking here. Are you claiming that there is no way for life saving drugs to be produced without evoking some capitalist monolith that would inevitably corrupt all the good inherent in curing disease? I don’t think the comparison the police holds any water. They are corrupt by function, which is the protection of private property in a class society, I don’t see the corruption of big pharma emanating from the function of producing products that treat illnesses. Are you seriously suggesting that you would do away with all the progress that has been made through the mass availability of pharmaceuticals over the last 100 years, and you can provide a convincing argument that the overall welfare of humanity would be better for that? Shouldn't the argument rather be that the re-organisation of production on a non-profit basis along with putting availability on an egalitarian footing would solve many of the problems?


I'm a public sector medical statistician. I've spent the last twenty years exposing the pharmaceutical industry's penchant for harming people for profit. I am certain that we'd be a lot better off without an all-powerful industry that spends far, far more on marketing than it does on R&D.

I am saying that you cannot shrug off the conflicts of interest produced by capitalism by defending the technology regardless of the framework within which it is implemented. The profit motive creates irreconcilable conflicts of interest which diverts things which could do great good into the hands of those who will use them to do great harm, if that's what it takes to fill their pockets with money.

And no, I don't think we need them to have access to any benefits the technology might provide. They would not exist without the publicly-funded science that created their product in the first place.


----------



## BigTom (May 12, 2012)

treelover said:


> 250,000 and growing tonight in Barecelona, youth unemployment is terrible here in the UK, but no real reaction...
> 
> why?


 
UK youth unemployment = 22%. Spain = 53% iirc.
UK adult unemployment = 8%. Spain = 20% again iirc.


----------



## kavenism (May 12, 2012)

ymu said:


> I'm a public sector medical statistician. I've spent the last twenty years exposing the pharmaceutical industry's penchant for harming people for profit. I am certain that we'd be a lot better off without an all-powerful industry that spends far, far more on marketing than it does on R&D.
> 
> I am saying that you cannot shrug off the conflicts of interest produced by capitalism by defending the technology regardless of the framework within which it is implemented. The profit motive creates irreconcilable conflicts of interest which diverts things which could do great good into the hands of those who will use them to do great harm, if that's what it takes to fill their pockets with money.
> 
> And no, I don't think we need them to have access to any benefits the technology might provide. They would not exist without the publicly-funded science that created their product in the first place.


 
I think we might be misunderstanding each other. You see the problem with capitalism, I agree. But I don't see the problem with drugs per se, no more than I see the problem with Patisserie Valerie, that resulted in my friend getting sacked today during a "trial shift", to have something to do with Iced Buns.


----------



## ymu (May 12, 2012)

kavenism said:


> I think we might be misunderstanding each other. You see the problem with capitalism, I agree. But I don't see the problem with drugs per se, no more than I see the problem with Patisserie Valerie, that resulted in my friend getting sacked today during a "trial shift", to have something to do with Iced Buns.


I am pointing out that the problem with your argument is that it relies on ignoring that capitalism exists.


----------



## xes (May 12, 2012)

Any live updates on this, can't get live streams working on phone


----------



## shaman75 (May 12, 2012)

here's me pics

















more at: http://entoptika.co.uk/occupy-may


----------



## purenarcotic (May 12, 2012)

I wonder how many of the coppers policing the protest had been out on the march. 

I'm feeling a wee sense of irony kicking in.


----------



## shaman75 (May 12, 2012)

police have packed up and gone for tea and donuts in their vans apparently


----------



## shaman75 (May 12, 2012)

Lot of obscured numbers today too


----------



## grit (May 13, 2012)

BigTom said:


> UK youth unemployment = 22%. Spain = 53% iirc.
> UK adult unemployment = 8%. Spain = 20% again iirc.


 
Yeah those numbers are about what I've seen, its on a completely different scale.


----------



## AKA pseudonym (May 13, 2012)




----------



## rekil (May 13, 2012)

Col_Buendia said:


> Am I missing something here or have the Dubs mastered a level of irony previously unseen in history?


Our paralooper brigade doing us proud. This tops allowing known neo-nazis to knock around at dame street.


----------



## Col_Buendia (May 13, 2012)

copliker said:


> Our paralooper brigade doing us proud. This tops allowing known neo-nazis to knock around at dame street.


Fair play. But I can't wait to hear what Ian Bone will have to say about the "it doesn't matter how many properties they've got in their portfolio" line...


----------



## bluestreak (May 13, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> I think what they say that they want is irrelevant - the fact that there is no process that has decided this for me/us is more fuckwitted.


 
i agree.  i washed my hands of occupy despite having been part of them, because really it's a bunch of middle class liberal hippies and the odd conspiraloon shouting everybody else down and dominating all attempts to guide the movement in a genuinely democratic way.  the much vaunted general assemblies are really only good for trolls and egotists, and it's become a pseudo-situationist version of a flashmob.  maybe i'll start the Provisional Occupy movement.  see if that's any more successful.


----------



## Chrispeptide (May 13, 2012)

shaman75 said:


> here's me pics
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 

Mmmmm.... like the first pic! Wonder if she would let me munch her rug!


----------



## frogwoman (May 13, 2012)




----------



## shaman75 (May 14, 2012)

That 'manifesto' seems to be from here: http://www.peoplesassemblies.org/2012/05/may-12th-globalmay-statement/


----------



## ymu (May 14, 2012)

Chrispeptide said:


> Mmmmm.... like the first pic! Wonder if she would let me munch her rug!


Fuck off you despicable cunt.


----------



## xes (May 14, 2012)

Media ain't touching this protest. I know it's a bit lack luster, but there should be something on it. I guess there's not been enough trouble to discount the movement for the scum to try and make everyone look evil.


----------



## shaman75 (May 14, 2012)

I really must go read the police guidance again, as i seem to have missed this arrest technique.






http://occupylondon.org.uk/archives/8408


----------



## Artaxerxes (May 14, 2012)

I do love reading the COLP alerts at work



> There are 4-5 "Occupy" demonstrators in the Paternoster area, police will be with and monitoring them until dipsersal, thank you.


 
Call the riot police!


----------

