Occupy Liberty (new Lalo Alcaraz Occupy Wall Street poster)

Discuss

48 Responses to “Occupy Liberty (new Lalo Alcaraz Occupy Wall Street poster)”

  1. Broken Chalk says:

    I’m not unintelligent, but I don’t really get what the 99 percent thing is about. It may be that you want to smack me on the forehead for me, but really – what is all this protesting about if it’s not just ‘I am entitled to something I didn’t earn myself.’ This is no troll, and I’m not Ayn Rand in disguise, but I really don’t get why US citizens are campaigning on their own streets about their own nation. Is there some kind of primer to be had? Because, otherwise, aren’t you all complaining about a constitution that you all helped put in place and swear allegiance to on a reasonably often basis, and yet are troubled by the fact it produces, or perhaps merely respects, inequality? Confused…

    • Anselm says:

      In essence, it’s an issue of double standards. It’s the upper crust and their complicated corporations jumping through loop holes that they got through very expensive lobbyists the rest of us can’t afford and so getting away with massive fraud. It’s about a system rigged to overreward the very upper edge of the income brackets and underreward everyone else. It’s about a decrease in wages (measured in buying power) that’s been ongoing for the past 30 years or so for the vast majority of Americans, and a massive increase in wages for that upper edge. Throw in major banks clumping together and essentially forming controlling lobbies, insider trading on an industrial level and increasingly eroding civil rights and an increasingly violent police force, and the people aren’t happy.

      In short, it’s about the 1% at the top being able to buy their way out of consequences the other 99% need to face, and increasing those consequences for the 99% to pay for the 1%’s buyout.

      Sound about right, folks?

      • daev says:

        Ya know, I was going to try to reply to Chalk’s post after reading the comments, but I see you’ve covered it very well already. That sounds about right to me.

        I find it disturbing that certain news outlets are trying to portray this as a mass panhandling event when it’s nothing of the sort. There is a world of difference between asking for something for nothing and being rather unhappy with continually getting less for more.

        Those dirty hippies can camp out in every city and town in the world for as long as they want, in my opinion. Hell, if they do it here, I’ll drive by and throw sandwiches out the window for them. Even those of us lucky enough to have a union job take a hit when the rest of us can’t afford even a decent existence.

        You want to change things? Buy local. Put your neighbors back to work.

    • Antinous / Moderator says:

      …aren’t you all complaining about a constitution that you all helped put in place…

      You know someone who helped put the Constitution in place? Send me his e-mail because I am all over that immortality shit.

    • Susan Carley Oliver says:

      Broken Chalk, this Rolling Stone article was posted earlier today, and lays it out fairly well.

    • elron says:

      If you want a primer, a good one is Robert Scheer’s “Great American Stickup.”  Basically, the United States is in a long recession that started when the banking system began to collapse in 2007-08.  Remember when the stock market lost about half its value?  This is a result of the banking industry successfully changing New Deal laws to de-regulate Wall Street (Citicorp, AIG, BOA, Goldman Sachs, etc) and energy markets (Enron).  Wall Street was gambling dangerously and short-sightedly for monumental profits, and without supervision (they lobbied it this way).  Many of the top people in these corporations got rich at our (the 99%) expense.  This is stealing.  They didn’t create an Apple computer–they manufactured derivatives and credit default swaps.  Wall Street money is purchasing congressional and presidential races (on both sides) with their riches.  Read this article about the new US wealth disparity:  http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/thirty_years_of_unleashed_greed_20111026/   

  2. ernunnos says:

    “I know! Let’s adopt as our symbol a creepy mask modeled on a terrorist who tried to blow up an early democratic institution and replace it with theocracy!”

  3. sam1148 says:

    I sometimes wish “Anonymous” wasn’t on ‘our side’ on this. They seem to be more like merry pranksters in it for lol..and poking fun at things.
    Something which is discounted by mainstream America as “silly” as he says. But fun theater, for those in on the joke.
    It’s like when the tea-party people started showing up period costumes it was mostly a ‘face palm’ for most people seeing that; something to be discounted as a joke. Good for a laugh tho…but this aint’ no party.

    • Lobster says:

      People have done some pretty horrible things under the banner of Anonymous.  Soulless, cruel things, that come as close to “evil” as I’m willing to assign such a loaded word, all because of the protections of their anonymity.

      I used to say that they couldn’t disown themselves of that, and that yes, if you’re going to advertise yourself as a faceless aggregate then the actions of the few DO reflect upon the character of the many.  But one cannot hold grudges, and must allow the begrudged a chance to change.  Anonymous has done some good lately, without anything TOO horrific coming to the surface.  So for the time being, I’ve decided to go a bit easier on them.  For the time being.

      Just don’t get me started on LulzSec.

  4. Terry Border says:

    Totally agree wtih previous two commenters. Good for a laugh, but not so good for the movement to say the least. 

  5. e smith says:

    That mask is the only thing widely accepted thing in the OWS ‘movement’ that I really really dislike. Fer Christ sakes, enough taking on the paraphernalia of a mediocre movie  for the face of a movement

    • Lobster says:

      That’s a Guy Fawkes mask.  They didn’t invent it for the movie.  Guy Fawkes was a real guy.  Tried to blow up the British parliament.  Now he’s a symbol of rebellion against the government.

      Even though he was rebelling because he thought the government wasn’t religious enough…

  6. Lobster says:

    What’s the connection with Anonymous? 

    Oh well.  If the two join forces then maybe the politicians won’t try to subvert or consume the Occupy movement.  I don’t think anyone wants to be associated with them.

  7. Lauren Read says:

    These materials are good for morale, but taking the demonstations to action that effectively replaces the corrupt Congress is better for all.  http://occupygovernment.org aims to do just that; give it a look and maybe get involved.

  8. Teller says:

    Expensive, work-intensive sorta idea. Instead of the Guymask, each 99% poster has a different OWS face shopped over Ms Liberty’s.

    /artist to teller, stfu.

  9. Susan Carley Oliver says:

    Hmmm…it looks like my link didn’t take, and disqus isn’t letting me edit the post (“can’t find the server at boingboing.secure.disqus.com”).  Here’s the link in plain text:

    http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/owss-beef-wall-street-isnt-winning-its-cheating-20111025

  10. tempo says:

    The use of the Fawkes/Anonymous mask in the poster was a rather poor choice.

  11. Stefan Jones says:

    Another good one, by Dalia Lithwick:

    Occupy the No-Spin Zone

    For the past several years, while the mainstream media was dutifully reporting on all things Kardashian or (more recently) a wholly manufactured debt-ceiling crisis, ordinary people were losing their health care, their homes, their jobs, and their savings. Those people have taken that narrative to Facebook and Twitter—just as citizens took to those alternative forms of media throughout the Middle East as part of the Arab Spring. And just to be clear: They aren’t holding up signs that say “I want Bill O’Reilly’s stuff.” They aren’t holding up signs that say “I am animated by toxic levels of envy and entitlement.” They are holding up signs that are perfectly and intrinsically clear: They want accountability for the banks that took their money, they want to end corporate control of government. They want their jobs back. They would like to feed their children. They want—wait, no, we want—to be heard by a media that has devoted four mind-numbing years to channeling and interpreting every word uttered by a member of the Palin family while ignoring the voices of everyone else.

  12. Bartacus says:

    The trite appropriation of imagery and lazy photoshopping might be easier to accept if it were from someone who wasn’t Lalo Alcaraz.

  13. Bartacus says:

    It’s also copyrighted.   How un-boingy.

  14. habbi1974 says:

    aaahhrggggg!!! pixel fonts out of grid!!!  >=(

  15. anharmyenone says:

    I guess the OWS kitchen staff rebellion wasn’t really serious. They were just trolling for the lulz. Cuz homeless people and people just released from prison have just as much right to join the OWS movement as anyone else right? They won’t face discrimination and will be accepted as equals right? I hope the OWS people weren’t just trolling us all along with their talk of equality. The conservative blogosphere is covering OWS much more than BoingBoing is. BoingBoing covers the *police reaction* to OWS, and the *abstract idea* of OWS, but they seem to have a news blackout in effect regarding the actual real happenings in Zuccotti Park. Did you hear about Pulse (the drummers) upset about OWS leaders limiting them to 2 hours of drumming a day and at the OWS leaders “taxing” the money that passers-by throw in the hat in appreciation for the drumming while the drummers need money for new drums as theirs were vandalized? The drummers believe drumming is as vital to OWS as a heartbeat is to a living organism, thus the name Pulse. What do you think about that? There is so much news we’re not getting from BoingBoing about the happenings in Zuccotti Park. You’d think they didn’t think OWS was news-worthy. Down-twinkles. I am disappoint. :)

    • penguinchris says:

      Yeah, conservative blogs probably are covering different parts of the protests than BB is. And mainstream media is covering from a third angle. What’s your point?

      Are conservative blogs really discussing persecution of the drum circle more than the police (over-)reaction? If so, that’s… well, words fail me. They’re also focusing on the drug users and trouble makers (who may or may not be plants) too, right?

      The real story in protests like this is how people in power react to them, whether it’s the police/military response or a move toward real change from those in position to do something about it. That’s what BB is covering. Primarily, the response from those in power so far has been police.

      Do you want to know why BB isn’t covering the drum circle happenings (I heard about the 2-hour restriction from BB, but we’ll ignore that for a moment)? Because nobody fucking likes the drum circle except (apparently) those who are drumming. It’s an annoying nuisance at best, and not “as vital to OWS as a heartbit is to a living organism.” I find it quite humorous that OWS organizers are taxing them – it’s a financial incentive to get the fuck out. And their drums were vandalized… do you need a stronger hint than that?

  16. CaptainK says:

    The mayor of Portland, Oregon has stated that the local occupiers have a Constitutional right to occupy a city park despite ordinances to the contrary; now he has announced they cannot move to any other park. Is that not limiting their rights? Do only certain rights belong in certain parks?

    • ChicagoD says:

      Well, he wasn’t right on the law the first time and is now trying to keep from compounding his error. Better to give permits without referencing the First Amendment if that’s what you want to do. It avoids your very reasonable question.

  17. This one was better in all ways:  http://laloalcaraz.com/new-occupy-los-angeles-and-wall-st-poster-by-lalo-alcaraz/occupy-los-angelesalan-minsky

    Also check out occupydesign.org for inforgraphics  and http://www.occupytogether.org for other nice posterwork

  18. strato says:

    Anonymous doesn’t even support OWS. Every time someone shows up at a protest in that Guy Fawkes mask, Anonymous throws a fit. It’s kind of a misappropriated symbol in the first place, it shouldn’t be further misappropriated. Only thing “Anonymous” did was ID that cop, which is pretty cool I guess.

  19. awjt says:

    You know what?  People suck.  I’m going to hide in my hidey hole.

  20. woid says:

    Every time somebody buys one of those awful Guy Fawkes masks, Time Warner (a corporation) gets a royalty. (I read it on the internet, so…)

    Think the TW lawyers will be OK with Lalo claiming copyright to “their” image?

    • daev says:

      They’ll try. I’d expect there to be some pro bono defense (hell, if there’s not, I’ll donate). Clearly derivative use.

  21. lvl99 says:

    Anyone else incensed that the artist is basically using this to make money and gain followers? And it’s a terrible Photoshop job.

    • daev says:

      He’s promoting himself. I, for one, have no problem with that. Keep in mind his website seems to only display a portion of his work and this becomes, basically, an awesome one-shot plug for him (I really liked his “show me your papers” poster).  I hope his exposure on BB boosts him some, there’s a lot of smart irony and entendre in what I saw on his site.

    • I thought exactly the same thing, it’s a terrible Photoshop job and the font is blurry as hell. Wait until Time Warner sick their lawyers on him.

  22. Mister44 says:

    I didn’t realize Lady Liberty was Italian.

  23. MrCoelho says:

    Does Time Warner get to collect royalties for use of their mask in the poster?

  24. As a supporter of the Occupy Movement (Occupy Burlington Vermont begins today!) I have to say I absolutely loathe the Anonymous /Fawkes mask stuff. Occupy is NOT Anonymous and Anonymous is NOT Occupy.

    Carry on.

  25. Art says:

    Up the American Revolution 2.0!  (AR2.0)

    Get the poster, while offer lasts.

  26. Art says:

    Thank you, Abbie.

  27. Art says:

    Most assuredly.  TimeWarner owns the image.  (Of course the irony of corporate ownership of revolutionary concepts is not lost)

    But from the NY Times: “What few people seem to know, though, is that Time Warner, one of the largest media companies in the world and parent of Warner Brothers, owns the rights to the image and is paid a licensing fee with the sale of each mask”.

    • dnietz says:

      Well, they currently technically legally own the “rights” to the image.

      But since the 99% movement is protesting and proposing many changes to existing laws and structures, I would say we can argue against their “right” to own that image.

      It isn’t one of the priority issues, but the current patent and copyright laws are one of the problems with corporate America. I choose to not accept their rights of ownership to that image.

      • geekcalif says:

        “I would say we can argue against their “right” to own that image.”

        First, who is “we”? Do you speak for OWS or the artist? You mean even if TW legally owns the image, you are arguing against their legal right to do so? What do you base this on? You are certainly free to ‘choose’ not to accept copyright laws.  In fact you can choose not to accept any laws you wish. It’s called magical thinking.

  28. geekcalif says:

    I see he (stupidly) put a copyright symbol on his poster.  TimeWarner is bound to get uppity about that.

Leave a Reply