Occupy Wall Street’s social networking site


[There have been updates to this post.]

03.07.12 If one has visited any of the Occupy websites, one may have noticed that references to the two major corporate social networking sites can be frequently found on the Occupy websites, which does not make a lot of sense to me since Occupy is protesting the 1%. The two major corporate social networking sites are part of the 1%. I will not name the two major corporate sites so as not to give them any promotion, but I suspect most people reading this know the two sites I’m writing about. So I have a question:

Sunrise over Occupy

Sunrise over Occupy

Why is Occupy or their supporters registered with, on, using and promoting corporatist and data-mining FB? Again, FB is the 1% and by using FB one is supporting them. Have people forgotten (or do they not care?) that as of 2011, the founder of FB’s personal wealth was estimated to be $24 billion. That’s the 1%. Are people not aware of Goldman Sachs investment in FB? Research: F***B*** has raised $500 million from Goldman Sachs in a transaction that values FB at $50 billion. Oh by the way, that’s the same Goldman Sachs that received $10 billion in bailout dinero/money from the U.S. government/taxpayers. Remember that? That’s also part of what Occupy is protesting/opposed to supposedly. So again, why is Occupy or their supporters having anything to do with FB? As part of the 99%, I refuse to have anything to do with data-mining and corporatist FB. I also remember my frustration with OWS during the early days at Freedom Plaza in Manhattan when on the Live Stream one of the occupiers suggested to someone there in the plaza to go over to Brooklyn to get bottled water for them and the person on camera suggested going to a corporate box store to get the water. (Sigh). Spending dinero/money at a corporate box store has sent and sends U.S. jobs and dinero to other countries, such as China as one example. (It’s called outsourcing or off-shoring of jobs and it’s bad for the U.S., the U.S. economy and the workers here). A corporate box store is part of the 1%. Why is anyone still shopping at corporate box stores and especially someone who supports or is connected with Occupy? Corporate box store dollars (think lobby dinero/money) help install “free trade” agreements. Anyone who is part of the 99% or supports the 99% should be shopping at small, independent stores, preferably local, “green” stores and worker-owned cooperatives—if you are fortunate to have one in your area— whenever possible. I must say that it’s as if some people connected with the Occupy movement are not clear on the concept of what they are protesting and opposed to, because they talk negatively and truthfully about the 1%, but then out of the other side of their mouth they advertize and promote the 1% by frequently mentioning FB and/or the other corporate networking site which begins with the letter T. Speaking of the social network which begins with the letter T, the most recent information I can find about that site is that their revenue was listed (estimated) at $140 million for 2010. Then they received $300 million at the end of 2011 from the Saudi royal family. All of this is part of the 1%. This is exactly why we need an Occupy Wall Street “green,” non-corporate social networking site. Remember Bank Transfer Day? Well, on Bank Transfer Day many people connected with the Occupy movement and their supporters took their dinero out of the big corporate banks and put their dinero in local credit unions or small independent local banks. That was good. That was a start, but one has to do more than that! They could have had an Abandon Corporate Box Stores Campaign but then Occupy doesn’t seem to understand the many problems with corporate box stores and their being part of the 1%. From what I read, Occupy Wall Street received a lot of dinero in donations while they occupied Freedom Plaza. If they haven’t blown that dinero on bailing people out of jails and other court costs, why don’t OSW start their own non-corporate, “green” social networking site? Then one can say, “Occupy me” instead of “FB me.” That would make quite a statement and is certainly better than the original pro-corporate statement. Is there anyone using FB that is concerned about all the data-mining of FB? After looking at OWS’s website from a website developers technical perspective, I would think Occupy Wall Street would have the necessary people who would know how to create a non-corporate “green” social networking site as far as coding and all that type of thing is concerned. Consider this “getting off the [corporate] grid,” since the two major corporate networking sites are a type of grid that many people are addicted to and/or dependent on, and wouldn’t know what to do if these networking sites were not there for them. Does Occupy Wall Street have the dinero for a large bank of servers to set up a “green,” non-corporate social networking site? What would be talked about on their social network? I suppose much of what would be talked about would be their plans for upcoming protests and events. As I’m writing this, I read this article: US Congress expands authoritarian anti-protest law. I’m not sure how much protesting Occupy will be allowed in the future, if any. I would guess that just as Occupy sites were violently shut down across the U.S. the first time around, that they would be shut down violently again especially in an election year. Occupy Wall Street protesters continue to report troubling incidents of excessive police surveillance. As for H.R. 347, it should be pointed out that H.R. 347 passed with the support of all the Democrats in congress (both the House and Senate). Three Republicans in the House voted against this resolution. H.R. 347 was approved unanimously by the Senate and signed by Obama. Looking around on various websites and reading message forums, I noticed a major silence about this repressive H.R. 347 from the Democratic Faithful. It would seem that the Democrats (partisan voters) are quite content with their rights being taken away by their beloved, misnamed “Democratic” Party politicians. Not even a whimper from them. Nothing. They only have a problem with Republicans taking away their rights. That’s when Democrats yell and scream. Otherwise, they remain silent. I had not intended to get into this partisanship stuff, but it is because of political parties and partisanship that have led us to where we are today and which ignited the Occupy movement. And from what I’ve seen from people, most people will remain firmly cemented and unwavering in their partisan-induced state of being. Partisanship is really like a highly addictive strong drug for most people. It induces the thinking in people that it’s all right when my “leader” does it and when the “leader” or the politicians are from my party. The party and party allegiance justify the actions no matter how reprehensible (otherwise the Democratic Faithful would be protesting their party’s actions). It’s all about the party and party loyalty and devotion. The party has priority, not ethics or the US Constitution), and the party does not have to stand for anything either.—rosa barrio

In addition to my suggestion that Occupy Wall Street create their own “green” and non-corporate social networking site (which would be good to have and to compete with the two major corporate networking sites even when/if Occupy is not allowed to protest in the U.S.), here are other ways to “get off the grid” by changing to solar and wind energy sources:
solar education

UPDATE: Hola. After I posted the above, I was doing a bit more research and learned that as of Octobre/October 13, 2011 Occupy Wall Street had started their own social networking site. It was called nycga.net (for New York City General Assembly) and was developed in open-source WordPress. I went to nycga.net and found nothing there so I guess the idea was abandoned after the national crackdown on Occupy sites in the U.S.

UPDATE: Hola. It’s 03.11.12 and I read today that donations are way down for OWS and they are running out of dinero. On 03.02.12 they had $44,828 in a general fund and $90,000 for bail dinero (bailing protesters out of jail). OWS says they will be out of dinero in 3 weeks. OWS received $700,000 in donations since the beginning of the movement. On their site they wrote that $3,590 was spent on MetroCards (bus and subway passes). If most of their activities have been in Manhattan, why didn’t they buy some bicycles (along with locks and helmet) to cycle around Manhattan? Bicycles would have been a good investment of the dinero. Their social networking site (www.nycga.net) is now there, it’s in beta form and they’re using WordPress and BuddyPress. I was just there. It was down this past week when I posted the above update. I’m not too optimistic about the future of the Occupy movement at this point. I think people are losing interest in Occupy (which speaks to the dwindling donations). In addition to what I’ve written in the post above about OWS’s social networking site and restrictions on protests, I read today that peaceful anti-fracking protesters are being pursued by the FBI as ‘Eco-Terrorists.’ Also, the U.S. military has unveiled the “non-lethal” heat ray weapon (called the Active Denial System) which produces a sensation of unbearable, sudden heat. And what “creative ideas” might they have for that? (“You’re Gonna Feel It:” U.S. Military Unveils New Crowd Control “Heat Ray.” Marine Col: “I think our forces will figure out the many different applications that it would have.”) I also just learned that OWS’s meeting on 03.11.12 is at corporatist box store Whole Foods (upstairs) on Houston Street in Manhattan. Why are they doing anything with corporatist WF? (Sigh). They are not clear on the concept.—rosa barrio

Outlaw Occupy: U.S. set to strangle protests with jail threats:

Police crack down on protesters on OWS six months anniversary

03.21.12 NYPD Riot Cops Remove Occupy Protesters from Union Square. Occupy Wall Street takes on NYPD, calls for end to harrassment, brutality, and surveillance

Is anyone surprised?:
04.17.12 NYPD Raid Occupy’s Sleep-In Protest. Arrests in defiance of 2000 court ruling allowing such protests