OCCUPY WALL STREET BY MONEY (English)

Dear everyone, including 99% that Wall Street occupied

How about establish a fund?

Everybody occupy the Wall Street by crowd and barricades.
If occupy Wall Street, you had better with the money, don't you?

Now, what's going on in America?
Isn't it ENCLOSURE?

＞Enclosure or inclosure is the process which ends traditional rights such as mowing meadows for hay, or grazing livestock on common land.
＞Once enclosed, these uses of the land become restricted to the owner, and it ceases to be common land.
＞In England and Wales the term is also used for the process that ended the ancient system of arable farming in open fields.
＞Under enclosure, such land is fenced (enclosed) and deeded or entitled to one or more owners.
＞By the 19th century, unenclosed commons had become largely restricted to rough pasture in mountainous areas and to relatively small parts of the lowlands.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enclosure)
＞Enclosure - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The enclosure has following two features.
(1) Changes in industrial structure due to labor migration
(2) Generation of disposable labor
It is what going on in America, isn't it?

What going on in America is ENCLOSURE, isn't it?

Why this historical event which happened in UK in past, happens in USA in present?
I wonder, ENCLOSURE was not limited in Britain.
I have the following hypotheses.

The colonization is the ENCLOSURE applied globally.

Rationale is that, the progress of colonization in Africa and India, has similar characteristics to the progress of enclosure in Britain.

The features of ENCLOSURE.
(1) Changes in industrial structure due to labor migration
(2) Generation of disposable labor

(1) Changes in industrial structure due to labor migration
Africa
>The difficulty was that subsistence farmers had few needs and often felt that regular employment savoured of slavery and that these tasks were women's work. Europeans, frustrated by seeing large profits slipping away from them, had'fear had to take the place of ambition or covetousness as the motive sentiment inducing them to labour'. T h e solutions were primitive and often brutal. For government purposes forced labour was used, with the chiefs designating those w h o were to work. Individual and hut taxes were imposed, with, in some areas and more frequently in the earlier years of the system, the possibility of commuting payment to labour. The Mossi of Upper Volta, following the introduction of taxation after the French conquest in 1896, at first attempted to increase production and trading, but soon the young men began to seek paid seasonal employment in the Gold Coast, only to find the taxes trebled between 1906 and 191o.
(p.473-p.474)
(http://www.unesco.org/new/en/culture/themes/dialogue/general-and-regional-histories/general-history-of-africa/volumes/complete-edition/volume-vii-africa-under-colonial-domination-1880-1935/)
>Volume VII - Africa under Colonial Domination 1880-1935 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

India
>The ruin of Indian handicrafts was reflected in the ruin of the towns and cities which were famous for their manufactures.
>The tragedy was heightened by the fact that the decay of the traditional industries was not accompanied by the growth of modern machine industries as was the case in Britain and western Europe. Consequently, the ruined handicraftsmen and artisans failed to find alternative employment.
>The only choice open to them was to crowd into agriculture. Moreover, the British rule also upset the balance of economic life in the villages.
>The gradual destruction of rural crafts broke up the union between agriculture and domestic industry in the countryside and thus contributed to the destruction of the self-sufficient village economy. On the one hand, millions of peasants, who had supplemented their income by part-time spinning and weaving, now had to rely overwhelmingly on cultivation; on the other, millions of rural artisans lost their traditional livelihood and became agricultural labourers or petty tenants holding tiny plots.
>They added to the general pressure on land.
>Thus British conquest led to the deindustrialisation of the country and increased dependence of the people on agriculture. No figures for the earlier period are available but, according to Census Reports, between 1901 and 1941 alone the percentage of population dependent on agriculture increased from 63.7 percent to 70 percent. This increasing pressure on agriculture was one of the major causes of the extreme poverty of India under British rule.
>(P.183-P.184)
(Modern India:A History Textbook for Class XII/Bipan Chandra/http://www.scribd.com/doc/77142479/Modern-India-a-History-Textbook-for-Class-XII-Chandra-Bipan)

(2) Generation of disposable labor
Africa
>Little is known of the nineteenth-century death rates, but in 1915 the British Consul on Sao T o m e and Principe claimed a death rate of ioo per thousand among the indentured labourers there, while a similar rate has been calculated for forced labour on the railway from Brazzaville to the sea in 1922. The latter rate contrasts with one of 150 per thousand for the pre-First World W a r Cameroon railway. The Mossi made a proverb out of the situation when they said that 'White Man's work eats people', and the French administration of Upper Volta intervened to have rations and wages improved during the 1920s for construction workers on the Ivory Coast railway so as to attempt to reduce the toll in lives. Similarly bad conditions prevailed on those plantations which did exist, as is evidenced by the loss in 1902 of one-fifth of the workforce a year in Cameroon.
(p.474-p.475)
(http://www.unesco.org/new/en/culture/themes/dialogue/general-and-regional-histories/general-history-of-africa/volumes/complete-edition/volume-vii-africa-under-colonial-domination-1880-1935/)
>Volume VII - Africa under Colonial Domination 1880-1935 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

India
>A major characteristic of British rule in India, and the net result of British economic policies, was the prevalence of extreme poverty among its people.
>The poverty of the people found its culmination in a series of famines which ravaged all parts of India in the second half of the 19th century. The first of these famines occurred in Western U.P. in 1860-61 and cost over 2 lakh lives. In 1865-66 a famine engulfed Orissa, Bengal, Bihar, and Madras and took a toll of nearly 20 lakh lives, Orissa alone losing 10 lakh people. More than 14 lakh persons died in the famine of 1868-70 in Western U.P., Bombay, and the Punjab. Many states in Rajputana, another affeted area, lost 1/4th to 1/3rd of their population.
>Perhaps the worst famine in Indian history till then occurred in 1876-78 in Madras, Mysore, Hyderabad, Maharashtra, Western U.P. and the Punjab. Maharashtra lost 8 lakh people, Madras nearly 35 lakhs, Mysore nearly 20 per cent of its population, and U.P. over 12 lakhs, Drought led to a country-wide famine in 1896-97 and then again in 1899-1900. The famine of 1896-97 affected over 9.5 crore people of whom nearly 45 lakhs died. The famine of 1899-1900 followed quickly and caused widespread distress. I spite of official efforts to save lives through provision of famine relief, over 25 lakh people died. Apart from these major famines, many other local famines and scarcities occurred. William Digby, a British writer, has calculated that, in all, over 28,825,000 people died during famines from 1854 to 1901. Another famine in 1943 carried away nearly 3 million people in Bengal. These famines and the high losses of life in them indicate the extent to which poverty and starvation had taken ro
ot in India. >(P.194)
(Modern India:A History Textbook for Class XII/Bipan Chandra/http://www.scribd.com/doc/77142479/Modern-India-a-History-Textbook-for-Class-XII-Chandra-Bipan)

The colonization is the ENCLOSURE applied globally, isn't it?

From this, isn't it possible to understand what is happening in America now? That is,

America is about to be colonized.

What country plot to make the United States of America colony?
You may wonder so.
So, I want ask you one question.
Do country need for colonization?

Remember.
India was colonized by a private company named English East India Company.
Country is not required for Colonization.

By the way, what is Colonialism?
I have the following hypotheses.

Colonialism is a kind of feudalism.

>In Europe, the decline of feudalism and the concomitant rise of capitalism witnessed the brutal destruction of peasant independence and the creation of a working class whose members had no alternative but to seek wage labour as a means of survival.
(p.336)
(http://www.unesco.org/new/en/culture/themes/dialogue/general-and-regional-histories/general-history-of-africa/volumes/complete-edition/volume-vii-africa-under-colonial-domination-1880-1935/)
>Volume VII - Africa under Colonial Domination 1880-1935 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

Isn't this misunderstanding?
>Gentleman Gentleman by people who are not (the people), the rule of construction, the mid-nineteenth century, extended the time to influence the so-called industrial capital layer is complete and the industrial revolution did not change essentially.
>However, due to changes in economic structure and will this time, more land was the major form of asset class and security.
>Gentleman's principal, the security holders from landlords, and that is going to shift to the city. Economic activity was inherited as a wealthy landowner and to holders of such securities, the "gentlemanly capitalism" call.
>These financial activities of the city, from Lancashire and Midoranzu manufacturing industry, the world - especially foreign governments and foreign companies - from that target, the structure of the dominant gentleman was not readily associate with imperialism.
>(p.014/新版世界各国史 11 イギリス史/編者河北稔/山川出版社/ISBN 4-636-41410-4)
(http://www.amazon.co.jp/%E3%82%A4%E3%82%AE%E3%83%AA%E3%82%B9%E5%8F%B2-%E4%B8%96%E7%95%8C%E5%90%84%E5%9B%BD%E5%8F%B2-%E5%B7%9D%E5%8C%97-%E7%A8%94/dp/4634414104/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1343374541&sr=1-1)
(Google 翻訳:http://translate.google.co.jp/?hl=ja&tab=wT)
Following is above origenal text.
＞ジェントルマンによるジェントルマンでない人々(民衆)の支配という構造は、十九世紀中ごろ、産業革命が完成していわゆる産業資本家層が勢力を伸ばした時期にも、本質的には変化しなかった。
＞ただ、このころになると経済構造の変化のために、資産の主要な形態が土地よりは証券類となった。
＞ジェントルマンの主体は、地主から証券保有者に、つまりシティに転換していくのである。このように地主から証券保有者へと受け継がれた資産家としての経済活動を、｢ジェントルマン資本主義｣と呼ぶ。
＞こうしたシティの金融活動は、ランカシャやミドランズの製造工業よりは、海外‐とくに外国政府や海外企業‐を対象としたから、ジェントルマン支配の構造は、容易に帝国主義と結びつくものであった。

I wonder, Feudalism did not declined, but also changed.
From the Land-based feudalism.
To the Securities-based feudalism.
And, corporate shareholders are the today's feudal lord, aren't they?

The Securities feudalism
I wonder, Colonialism is the Securities-based feudalism.

If you use above viewpoint, then it may easy to understand the age of imperialism and colonialism era.
It is conceivable that, the age of imperialism and colonialism, is the age of turf war by Securities feudal lords.

I have the following hypotheses.
What is the Feudal?
The Feudal is a master-servant relationship, which intermediately united by the interest, and which the life-and-death power holder force holdee the unilateral obedience.

Capital build a relationship master-servant relationship.
Shareholders hold the life-and-death power for companies.
It will be able to say that company is a sort of Feudal system.

1%
They say that, the wealthy class of "the top earning 1%" consists corporate shareholders and managers.
It may be able to say that, the wealthy class of "1%" is a kind of feudal lord.
And now, the same situation as the age of imperialism and colonialism, has probably happened.

Well,
How do we fight against the Feudal Lord?
We must have Weapon.
What kind of Weapon can fight against the Feudal Lord?
It is the same weapon which the Feudal Lord uses to dominate. YES!

MONEY

The weapon can be a double-edged sword.
here is possibility that the sharp edge of weapon direct in the contrary direction, if user is changed.
Does that mean,
"99%" use MONEY as a Weapon, and direct the sharp edge of weapon toward "1%" regime.

However, in terms of the power of money, there is no comparison between "1%" and "99%" posses.
In order to fight against "1%", it is necessary to concentrate the power of money which 99%" posses.

Fund

Fund raise money then invest.
"1%" concentrate the power, and do the same thing as "99%".
I named this Fund as follow.

NPF
National Political Fund

"99%" bring a power game on "99%", using "1%"'s own Weapon against "1%".
This is the function of this fund.
How about it?

Dear everyone, including 99% that Wall Street occupied

How about establish a fund?

Studies in Methodology for Tribalism
http://www.geocities.co.jp/WallStreet/7659/smt.html

***********************************************
v(^o^)v daisy Chun Jiuqien
( x ) daisy ICQ:38969410
m m=* daisy e-mail:chunjiuqien@infoseek.jp
***********************************************