Went to check out occupy Toronto

[koven]

First picture was from on the way there it wasn't as exciting as NYC.


33445 by MrEllis, on Flickr


reporteerr_ by MrEllis, on Flickr




treesdd by MrEllis, on Flickr


theworld by MrEllis, on Flickr


mannndd by MrEllis, on Flickr


fdddsdd by MrEllis, on Flickr

[Roger Hicks]

Shoot 'em while they're there, before the 1% run 'em out!

Personally, I'd have been inclined to shoot all mono or all colour. Somehow the two don't work side-by-side for me. Pic 4 (signs, B+W) works best for me.

Cheers,

R.

[kbg32]

I don't agree with your statement of lack of interest at all. I believe there is a tremendous amount of interest. I do think and agree that the movement should get it together and remove the "slacker" element though. Then a lot more people would be taking a lot more interest.

[jsrockit]

Originally Posted by Double Negative

The constant noise, homeless activity and drug use are doing nothing to further anyone's cause.

Yes, it's ashame really. Today they closed off the park and cleaned it though. Now there seems to be a fight between bloomberg and a judge about whether they will be allowed to stay overnight anymore (after bloomberg said no, a judge said yes). I see it every week day (and photograph it) and it has seemed to devolve over time.

[Vics]

Originally Posted by Double Negative

I don't know if I'd call what's going on at Zuccati "exciting."

It has devolved into a degenerate hippie fest of foulness. I was onboard with the "movement" in the beginning, but there's no more clear direction (if they ever really even had one) and I think most people have lost interest in the whole thing. At least that's the impression we get here in New York. The constant noise, homeless activity and drug use are doing nothing to further anyone's cause.

Nice pictures, though.

Plus one (ten characters)

[Glass Addict]

I visited the St. James park about 2 weeks ago and I spoke to a few people on why they are there, what they hope to achieve, how things should be changed, etc...

I remember myself being very disappointed with the answers. I realize the intention is good, but when there is no clear direction as a whole, the movement gradually loses legitimacy.

The whole place had this hippie-like ambiance, and many of the folks there couldn't hold a job even before all this happened. I don't feel that they are rightfully representing the 99%.

[emraphoto]

Originally Posted by claacct

The occupy Toronto people might be cleared out tonight and they have called people to come to St. James park at 11pm. Its tempting to go but its not worth a sleepless night, potential arrest and night photos which will be the same with hundreds or more photographers out there.

It was also very Canadian of the city to issue them a notice and plenty of time to clear our, unlike the middle of the night raid with stormtroopers...

ah, the protest photographer crowd. sometimes as big as the protest itself.

i was on contract at the g20 in Toronto and literally had to climb over photographers every time the police charged.

[nikon_sam]

I went to visit the OWS-Los Angeles group last time I was out there...Just a bunch of freeloaders sitting around with their signs all over the place...they weren't doing anything...
They are located on the grounds of City Hall and are making a mess of things...they've been provided portable toilets, trash/recycle bins and running water (not sure who's paying for that)
The only person I saw doing any protesting was on old man beating a plastic pail and shouting..."the dingo ate your baby..."
I wonder just how much longer they have...

emraphoto...there were several people taking pictures of the area, some were even tourist but all in all we were in the majority of people actually doing something...

[al1966]

I went to the one outside St Paul's yesterday and spoke to quite a few people. I did notice some of the hippie/punk crowd there but also pensioners and ordinary type people. There were a lot of the usual posters and placards along with a library a first aid tent and a food tent. Some of the people I spoke to where quite informed and even a police officer I spoke to was approving of some of the views expressed. The place did stink though. I thought that the idea behind the whole movement was that of people who were concerned with the way society has/is going, it is an umbrella of annoyed people all with sometimes very different views that ranged from left to right. Obviously I do not expect people who are working to be there, only a fool would quit a job to camp in London for a few weeks. I would say though that not enough questions have been asked in the mainstream media and any attempt of debate seems to be swiftly killed off. When I have developed the few photographs I took I may post them (if they are not rubbish). A lot of the protestors/campers were highly impressed that I was 'kicking it old school' rather than using digital.

[Roger Hicks]

Originally Posted by Glass Addict

I visited the St. James park about 2 weeks ago and I spoke to a few people on why they are there, what they hope to achieve, how things should be changed, etc...

I remember myself being very disappointed with the answers. I realize the intention is good, but when there is no clear direction as a whole, the movement gradually loses legitimacy.

The whole place had this hippie-like ambiance, and many of the folks there couldn't hold a job even before all this happened. I don't feel that they are rightfully representing the 99%.

Legitimacy? No. Credibility? Perhaps.

But remember that most anti-colonial movements started out with a wide range of ideals, dreams and demands, and coalesced into (often successful) movements to kick out what they perceived as the 'ruling class'. And what the "Occupy" people are complaining about, whether you agree with them or not, is the colonization (= exploitation) of the poor by the rich.

Yes, it may dissolve into nothing. Or it may not. I mean, who could ' rightfully represent the 99%', if most of the 99% are wage slaves working their arses off to pay their tuition fees, mortgages, car payments, health care costs (in the US), and so forth?

Debt is good only for the lenders, who are part of the bogeyman labelled (probably with more flair than accuracy) 'the 1%'. For those who owe money, most debt is unalleviated bad news.

I'm an old hippie. in the 60s I wore kaftans, had shoulder length hair, the whole bit. But nowadays (a) we don't have much in the way of "Occupy..." movements in France and (b) I'm old and lazy and fond of e.g. flush toilets, so I rather admire those who get off their bums and "occupy". It would be REALLY interesting to ask some of these "Occupy..." protesters what they'd be doing if they weren't "occupying". Which is better: staying home and smoking dope (the popular slur) or getting out and trying to change a system in which the best option is to stay home and smoke dope?

I believe that long after we're dead, and people read the history books of the 21st century in a hundred years' time, the "Occupy" movement is quite likely to be seen as an important movement, whether it changes society or not; or at the very least, as an important footnote. And if there are silver halide B+W prints, some people are going to say, "Wow! Can you imagine that? They were actually THERE. And this print was made from a piece of film that was THERE."

You can say this of anything you believe to be an important popular movement, such as the Tea Party, so it ain't party political. Wouldn't you be fascinated to see more pictures of Gandhi? Or pictures of 1930s-era Germany that weren't Nazi propaganda? Or pictures that actually show how filthy and slovenly the "Occupy" protesters are? Because without the pictures, is anyone going to believe you?

Cheers,

R.

[al1966]

Originally Posted by Roger Hicks

Legitimacy? No. Credibility? Perhaps.

But remember that most anti-colonial movements started out with a wide range of ideals, dreams and demands, and coalesced into (often successful) movements to kick out what they perceived as the 'ruling class'. And what the "Occupy" people are complaining about, whether you agree with them or not, is the colonization (= exploitation) of the poor by the rich.

Yes, it may dissolve into nothing. Or it may not. I mean, who could ' rightfully represent the 99%', if most of the 99% are wage slaves working their arses off to pay their tuition fees, mortgages, car payments, health care costs (in the US), and so forth?

Debt is good only for the lenders, who are part of the bogeyman labelled (probably with more flair than accuracy) 'the 1%'. For those who owe money, most debt is unalleviated bad news.


I'm an old hippie. in the 60s I wore kaftans, had shoulder length hair, the whole bit. But nowadays (a) we don't have much in the way of "Occupy..." movements in France and (b) I'm old and lazy and fond of e.g. flush toilets, so I rather admire those who get off their bums and "occupy". It would be REALLY interesting to ask some of these "Occupy..." protesters what they'd be doing if they weren't "occupying". Which is better: staying home and smoking dope (the popular slur) or getting out and trying to change a system in which the best option is to stay home and smoke dope?

I believe that long after we're dead, and people read the history books of the 21st century in a hundred years' time, the "Occupy" movement is quite likely to be seen as an important movement, whether it changes society or not; or at the very least, as an important footnote. And if there are silver halide B+W prints, some people are going to say, "Wow! Can you imagine that? They were actually THERE. And this print was made from a piece of film that was THERE."

You can say this of anything you believe to be an important popular movement, such as the Tea Party, so it ain't party political. Wouldn't you be fascinated to see more pictures of Gandhi? Or pictures of 1930s-era Germany that weren't Nazi propaganda? Or pictures that actually show how filthy and slovenly the "Occupy" protesters are? Because without the pictures, is anyone going to believe you?

Cheers,

R.

Seconded, except I was a bit punk in the late 70's early eighties. Of the people I talked to a couple of them had just finished degrees one in nursing, the other in history. Others had recently been made redundant from their jobs. One gentleman had worked for the same job for 35 years, not all the sort that spend all their days rolling big ones and watching day time tv.

[sevres_babylone]

Originally Posted by claacct

The occupy Toronto people might be cleared out tonight and they have called people to come to St. James park at 11pm. Its tempting to go but its not worth a sleepless night, potential arrest and night photos which will be the same with hundreds or more photographers out there.

It was also very Canadian of the city to issue them a notice and plenty of time to clear our, unlike the middle of the night raid with stormtroopers...

"Canadian" means something different to me after last year's G20, but...
in any event, there's a temporary injunction against removing the people camping in the park until Friday.

[Glass Addict]

Legitimacy and credibility are two sides of the same coin.

In order for the movement to gain legitimacy as in their saying "representing the 99%", it needs to gain credibility from the general public. It is my opinion that the movement lost that support from the public as time progressed.

Anti-colonial movements had specific, and realistic ideal, dreams and demands, but can we say the same for this movement? Maybe it is still in the early stages and hasn't had the time to coalesce, but it is quickly losing ground. As I said, I spoke to some folks here in Toronto and responses of most were unrealistic, contradictive, and some downright foolish. Maybe other parts of the world are different.

Yes, whether this movement is a success or a failure it will go down in history as "a movement" and an important one at that. It will be an interesting topic for discussion in the future. However, now in reality, whether this movement actually changes anything is what I wonder.

I fully support the movement (that's why I was there in the first place). However, in my opinion, lack of unity with unclear understanding of proposed changes and method of execution will effectively be the downfall of this movement.

One little tidbit regarding your comment though:

It would be REALLY interesting to ask some of these "Occupy..." protesters what they'd be doing if they weren't "occupying". Which is better: staying home and smoking dope (the popular slur) or getting out and trying to change a system in which the best option is to stay home and smoke dope?

Anyone can go out and protest, but someone who's just yelling out things that are "wrong" is complaining.. yelling how things are wrong and having some thought out plan for change, now that's a something else.

Originally Posted by Roger Hicks

Legitimacy? No. Credibility? Perhaps.

But remember that most anti-colonial movements started out with a wide range of ideals, dreams and demands, and coalesced into (often successful) movements to kick out what they perceived as the 'ruling class'. And what the "Occupy" people are complaining about, whether you agree with them or not, is the colonization (= exploitation) of the poor by the rich.

Yes, it may dissolve into nothing. Or it may not. I mean, who could ' rightfully represent the 99%', if most of the 99% are wage slaves working their arses off to pay their tuition fees, mortgages, car payments, health care costs (in the US), and so forth?

Debt is good only for the lenders, who are part of the bogeyman labelled (probably with more flair than accuracy) 'the 1%'. For those who owe money, most debt is unalleviated bad news.

I'm an old hippie. in the 60s I wore kaftans, had shoulder length hair, the whole bit. But nowadays (a) we don't have much in the way of "Occupy..." movements in France and (b) I'm old and lazy and fond of e.g. flush toilets, so I rather admire those who get off their bums and "occupy". It would be REALLY interesting to ask some of these "Occupy..." protesters what they'd be doing if they weren't "occupying". Which is better: staying home and smoking dope (the popular slur) or getting out and trying to change a system in which the best option is to stay home and smoke dope?

I believe that long after we're dead, and people read the history books of the 21st century in a hundred years' time, the "Occupy" movement is quite likely to be seen as an important movement, whether it changes society or not; or at the very least, as an important footnote. And if there are silver halide B+W prints, some people are going to say, "Wow! Can you imagine that? They were actually THERE. And this print was made from a piece of film that was THERE."

You can say this of anything you believe to be an important popular movement, such as the Tea Party, so it ain't party political. Wouldn't you be fascinated to see more pictures of Gandhi? Or pictures of 1930s-era Germany that weren't Nazi propaganda? Or pictures that actually show how filthy and slovenly the "Occupy" protesters are? Because without the pictures, is anyone going to believe you?

Cheers,

R.

[anthony_semone]

hehe, visited the Filthy/Philadelphia Occupy, and indeed it was: filthy! could smell the sh**hole a block away! Asked the police officer where everybody was? "Oh, they all have jobs to go to." LOLOL. I'd post some pics but they are with my Nikon F5 and 85/1.4 Ai-S