Billy Bragg must feel so embarrassed that he voted Lib Dem.

OCCUPY CHRISTMAS !!!

Style of thing

Thank you for having the courage to protest . You are doing much more than most of us would do. Good luck and keep safe.

The revolution is well under way, the age of banks is drawing close.
Defend your NHS.
Defend a child s right not to be a student debt slave.
No more wars.
Defend yourself.
Good luck everybody see you all on the other side.
Failure is not an option, we are the 99%
we can not lose.

What a snide blog! Implicit in this account is a disparaging 'aren't they just a bit pathetic' attack. If you would just stop bleating the establishment line - which keeps referring to the occupiers as 'so-called anti-capitalists' - and just really look at what is happening globally - then the size of the occupation is totally irrelevant. 1% of the global population control 48% of the global wealth. That equates to the top 500 earners in the world sharing between them the combined wealth of 3.5 Billion people. So let's not attack a few brave souls who are prepared to do something concrete about this obscene system. Save your snide comments for the true enemies of mankind- people like Donald Rumsfeld who managed to make a profit for himself out of the Iraq war!

Turn on the fountains.

Oh the misinformation is insane in the press. Im not sure whether you are trying to put down the mirror but they did not "dismissed them as 'an irrelevant bunch of ­attention-seeking, tree-hugging, middle-class kids' " but did in fact say "you could dismissed them as an irrelevant bunch of ­attention-seeking, tree-hugging, middle-class kids." You can read the mirror article here http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/columnists/routledge/2011/11/18/you-can-t-evict-truth-of-occupy-leeds-anti-capitalism-camp-115875-23569796/#.TsXUVqzDo9U.twitter

I expected more from the Guardian.

Hang in there guys and gals.

Let's also faithfully quote the final sentence from the Mirror piece "But nearer the spirit of Christmas than Tory economic policy any day of the week."

Read more: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/2011/11/18/you-can-t-evict-truth-of-occupy-leeds-anti-capitalism-camp-115875-23569796/#ixzz1e5j6RFKi

I really am disgusted by the bias of this piece. What exactly are trying to achieve John Baron? You going to defend this tabloid trash?

@Rodladder, @AvAbrew You know what, you're right. I'll have to hold my hands up on this one. My fault entirely, I read the Mirror piece in haste (too much haste for my own good) and in retrospect I've taken it out of context. My apologies for that. I'll get TPTB to amend the piece.

@Rodladder - certainly not my intention to be snide. I'm very proud of Leeds as a city and certainly wouldn't want to do it down. While I did the (much-missed in my humble opinion) Guardian Leeds blog I covered many of the events I mention in this piece such as the student protests and occupation, the occupation of the council chamber at the Civic Hall. And I seem to recall there was an incredible debate regarding the Cuts Cafe occupation in Eastgate (we were the only - or one of the few, I can't quite remember - media outlets to cover it.)

Thanks and many apologies, Rodladder and AvAbrew, and to Occupy Leeds. That has been put right. All best MW

Thanks for apologising - shows how tricky reportage can be!

The (London) Guardian Occupy Movement newsfeed is both fair and informative and I find myself referring to that newsfeed for the most balanced view of the occupy events. Not so the Northerner sadly -your blunder was unfortunate and retractions are a waste of time really....

I realise the Mirror article was a hard act to follow and stole a march on most of the local news sources but it was just well researched, well written and a heartwarming human story. Sorry your's wasn't.

We have to, democratically, pick a bank and everyone of us who has any kind of deal with them - move it!

I'm not saying where to - but definitely NOT Virgin. Maybe Co-op? (don't all shout I'm not dictating.

Dare THEM to bail out the bank we choose to close. We will have shown them that we can really do it.

We get a figure on the people who work at the bank we choose to pull out of (Below a certain level) and INSIST that the bank we move our money to re-employs all of them.............

Now that would make them re-negotiate

A handful of occupiers have been camping under the grey November clouds for a week now, determined to put across their anti-capitalist and bash the bankers messages.

I'm sorry, but this is very poor journalism as it invokes several logical fallacies. Using logical fallacies to try and make points in journalistic articles is either unreflective or lacks integrity.

The occupy movement as a whole are neither simplistically "anti-capitalist" and nor do they as a whole have a simplistic "bash the banker" message. At the very best these are @JohnBaron's mistaken perceptions. Misrepresenting the position of others to make them look ridiculous and easy to argue against is a well known dishonest tactic of argument called the straw man logical fallacy. It has been repeatedly pointed out why the labels that @JohnBaron used are inaccurate and misleading, but he just repeats them anyway. There is plenty of information available to any journalist willing to do a bit of basic research, which should immediately have told them why these labels are inaccurate, misleading and inappropriate.

What is hard to understand is that @JohnBaron was clearly informed of this and quotes it in his article.

One of the organisers of Occupy Leeds, Erika, said:

Occupy Leeds are a separate yet connected movement within the Occupy Movement. Our supporters and volunteers have their own unique views and opinions. It is misguided to try to generalise our entire movement, or our entire camp and is utterly ridiculous to do so based solely on what you may have seen on the mainstream media about other Occupy Camps, which may have never been in contact with us.

Yet despite being warned against using these misguided misrepresentations this is exactly what @JohnBaron does.

In general the occupy movement are only critical of unfettered capitalism, that is the unifying paradigm. Simply being critical about the way a rather extreme version of something operates does not imply that you want to do away with it completely and replace it with something else. But that is exactly what the term "anti-capitalist" implies. This is another logical fallacy, the false dichotomy i.e the false notion that someone is either totally in favour of something, or totally against it. It is a false dichotomy because invariably there are a 1001 perspectives which don't fit in with these extremes. The false dichotomy is actually a classic tool of the extremist or authoritarian state, as it allows them to treat anyone that does not whole-heartedly support everything they do as the enemy. Just how difficult is it to use a far more accurate descriptions like "critics of the way unfettered capitalism works", rather than "anti-capitalist"? There may very well be those supporting the occupy movement who are anti-capitalist and who want to replace capitalism with something else. However, there are lots of people with lots of very different views, but these are their own views and not general views of the occupy movement

Labelling people as "anti" anything when they are not is irresponsible and inflammatory. The idea that someone is totally against the present system and wants to replace it with an entirely different ideology creates fear, and incites extremists to violence. If idiots like the EDL and other far right groups chose to attack occupy protestors it is because journalists have been irresponsibly calling the occupy movement "anti-capitalist", which to the extreme right means that someone is a communist and therefore the enemy.

I vote to move all our money OUT of the Co-op. Where do we go now ?

Of all the Occupy movements I find this one the most insulting. I understand that the message reaches further than Leeds but why protest in a city that has done its best to protect people from cuts?

I wonder if Mr. Bullivant took the time to ask whether the protesters were in fact unemployed - for all he knows they could have taken time out to air their views. It is this kind of presumptive 'I'm all right Jack' attitude that is the real problem. Look the other way and watch your own back - exactly where 'they' want us to be and behave.

Hi again - I just wanted to pick up thecostumelady's point about retractions which I understand in a world where you can easily just say Sorry and continue on your merry way. But we don't do that here and both John and I recognise that post this was done too fast - no secret about how thinly resources are stretched in journalism these days - and we have learned a lesson from that.

The wider criticism aired by SteB1 is very interesting and I will leave John to answer it in in full but I take it on board. I think the piece, although inevitably short, covered a wide range of reactions and viewpoints and it isn't always easy to get over the sense of something physically small but raising big issues (in my opinion the very valuable role of Occupy protests, having visited both the Leeds and London ones and enjoyed quiet wide-ranging chat at both).

While here, can I also just echo John's reference to Guardian Leeds and to say that the Northerner very much welcomes blog posts from anyone in our three regions, as well of course as contributions on the threads. We cannot hope to restore the hyper-local nature of Guardian Leeds, barring miracles of resourcing, but I am ready and waiting to input as many guest blogs as I can manage at my age, and rudimentary level of mastering Firefox, Image Picker et al. Just use the Northerner email or our personal ones which are all firstname.secondname@guardian.co.uk

Because it is not just about the cuts. It is also a way to introduce people to a new political process:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus_decision-making

Pop along to a local GA and see the traditional Left/Right Brain and Political Model demolished...

It is absolutely disgraceful that in all the countries that say they are democracies there are NO DEMOCRACY PLACES or SPACES!

Public open space is set aside for those who like to play football, etc, Public Sports Halls have been built and are maintained for those who wish to do indoor sports. Idem, swimming pools. And we know that physical health is very important.

So to is "democratic health", but where are the public open and indoor spaces for this essential activity?

OK, people can use Village Halls, Community Centres, etc but these are usually used by organisations, and could require spending money...

...we have public parks where those who want can, fopr example, just turn up and play football in an informal way - so long as others are not using this space. So, THERE MUST BE EQUIVALENT DEMOCRACY PLACES where anyone could just turn up and discuss any topic with others who just turn up for the same goal!

In fact, such DEMOCRACY SPACES or PLACES should be as "sacred" as Cathedrals, and they should both be protected as such as well as equipped with toilets ( and better run by an independent NGO or charity that by a local authority ).

The Occupy Movements, as well as criticising all that they do - well done! - should prioritise the very belated creation of these DEMOCRACY SPACES or PLACES as from them they could continue what they have just started: this could well be their first priority because to reach agreement on anything else will take time, a lot of time, much longer even than occupiers could occupy a permanent camp because exhaustion would take its toll.

Let me put it plainly, all villages, towns, neighbourhoods of cities, should have DEMOCRACY SPACES or PLACES just like they have sports fields, sports halls and public parks - and without them it is doubtful that a real democracy could exist!

Best wishes to all peaceful Occupy protesters in Leeds, the clued up members of the public are with you!

As @martinwainwright says, you make some interesting points here. I will say in my defence that two of the people I spoke to actually said they were 'anti-capitalist' but perhaps I've over-simplified.

The Guardian offers an open platform for its readers to comment - which you've taken advantage of very well here. What we offer on The Northerner, as Martin says, is the opportunity to write guest posts. I'd be delighted if members of Occupy Leeds - or yourself if you're a member - wanted to write a guest post about their occupation and some of the reasons behind it. Drop us a line at northerner@guardian.co.uk - do take us up on the offer! Best, John

Despite the complaints above, this CIF does appear to capture the essence of both the "broader" occupy group as well as this particular one.

And the following sums up very well their problems in communicating with the public (and as demonstrated here, even with the occupy-friendly Guardian):

One of the organisers of Occupy Leeds, Erika, said:

Occupy Leeds are a separate yet connected movement within the Occupy Movement. Our supporters and volunteers have their own unique views and opinions. It is misguided to try to generalise our entire movement, or our entire camp and is utterly ridiculous to do so based solely on what you may have seen on the mainstream media about other Occupy Camps, which may have never been in contact with us.

--vague generalisations
--equally vague attempts at telling the public what they are not
--critical of public perceptions of them
--no effort to explain in clear or precise terms what they are actually for
--and continuing to absolve themselves of any responsibility for public perceptions of them.

These points have been repeatedly brought to their attention by many people, and many people across the political and ideological spectrums.

As polls show that public support for them is falling (at least in the US) and as more cities move to reclaim public spaces from them for the public, they only have themselves to blame.

Thanks for your response. I understand that my comments may have sounded harsh, but it was positive constructive criticism i.e. meant to lead to a better understanding - so I appreciate your positive response. Personally I'm not directly involved with the occupy movement, although I do fully support their aims and strategy. However, it is the one movement I would consider direct involvement in because I intuitively understand their position and strategy. For the last 40 years I've tried to understand the problems with our system, but was disillusioned because most approaches and analysis because it seemed wrong headed to me. This is the first movement I have seen that appears to understand the situation and what is needed to actually produce change. I am also optimistic it can produce positive change.

Having said all this I also fully realise that many individuals in the occupy movement might have different perspectives. Undoubtedly quite a few would describe themselves as anti-capitalist because that's the ideological background they come from. However, having read all I could by those involved in this movement around the world it's clear that there is no general anti-capitalist theme. The common theme is about reforming the way capitalism currently works, which is not the same as being simplistically being against capitalism. Being against something implies you want to replace it with another ideology, and not just reform it. Deciding how things should be run should be something the public decides. Not a few opinionated individuals who claim to have all the answers and then just ask the public to sign on the dotted line by voting for them.

I think what is different and puzzling to many people about the occupy movement is that it's approach is the opposite to the conventional political approach people are used to. Instead of someone telling the public they have the answers, they are saying to the public come and join us, and we will develop the solutions when there is enough public consensus on the need to reform the system. Initially it may seem wishy washy, but this is actually the most intelligent approach to solving problems. If you look at experts on problem solving like Edward de Bono they put great emphasis on first carefully identifying the problem, then evaluating possible solutions over time. The solution emerges from this process and it is a constant process of re-evaluation.

Generally the worst approach to problem solving is to impulsively come up with a big plan and then to work on persuading others to accept this. It's a bad approach because the first solution you come up with is inevitably not the best solution, unless the solution is fairly obvious. Conventional politics comes unstuck when it starts to become clear that the big plans they have developed are not working as expected. The politicians dare not admit that their plan was flawed through fear of losing face and credibility. So with lots of bluster they plough on with their approach even when it is clearly not working. It's best not to have a fully formed plan on how to produce the results you want. It is best to clearly think about what you want to achieve, but to be flexible about the approach you use to actually achieve these aims.

I think it is this which is causing a lot of misunderstanding. There is the generally accepted notion that the way politics works is for the ideologues to come up with all the answers, and then to try and sell them to the public. Whilst it is a very effective sales technique, it's a rubbish approach to effective problem solving. Unfortunately the politician who confidently claims they have all the answers is always going to be more convincing than a politician who honestly says I'm not sure what the best solutions are yet, and I intend to work on them as we go along and learn more about the situation.

Just think about this. Which doctor would you trust? A doctor who immediately came out with a diagnosis and cure before even examining you, or a doctor who wanted to examine you and carry out lots of medical tests, before deciding on the best approach for treating the problem?

Whilst I'm certainly no spokesperson for the occupy movement their approach seems very clear to me because I have spent a long time thinking about how the system works, and they appear to have arrived at similar conclusions themselves. If any occupy activists feel I'm misrepresenting anything please chip in as I'm listening and not trying to project my own notions onto it.

As polls show that public support for them is falling (at least in the US) and as more cities move to reclaim public spaces from them for the public, they only have themselves to blame.

Wishful thinking and trolling!

Thanks for your constructive and detailed comments - much appreciated.

I'm afraid not:

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2011/11/occupy-wall-street-favor-fading.html

Name-calling without facts doesn't make the world a better place.

I'm afraid not:

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2011/11/occupy-wall-street-favor-fading.html

Name-calling without facts doesn't make the world a better place.

Hmm, you still don't get it do you? I am well aware of this poll, but it doesn't mean anything at all. Unless something is an old issue the public are aware of like support for a particular party the response you get on polls depends what questions you ask. I don't have any of the research at hand but I believe quite a few studies have shown that the public is nearly as likely to offer an opinion on a made up story as a real one. They are often trying to give the answer they think they should or what they think polster wants to hear, rather than offering their considered opinion on the matter. Although of course you are probably well aware of that. However, the point you are missing entirely is that this movement is little more than weeks old. Most political parties and ideologies took decades to develop. Yet already the occupy movement has led to senior politicians and religious figures talking about public concerns about these issues. This is more than anyone else has managed for a long time. I just don't think you understand perception at all, and how it works. All your thinking is based on opinions about conventional political parties or well defined issues. You've got it all wrong. Come back in a year and try telling me the same story and you will get laughed at.

No name calling, just using the appropriate name for the particular activity you are engaged in.

A concern troll is a false flag pseudonym created by a user whose actual point of view is opposed to the one that the user claims to hold. The concern troll posts in Web forums devoted to its declared point of view and attempts to sway the group's actions or opinions while claiming to share their goals, but with professed "concerns". The goal is to sow fear, uncertainty and doubt within the group.[22]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29

Recognise the style. Your concern is very touching, if rather a transparent attempt to spread FUD.

So I offer actual facts and data.

And you offer a rather verbose ad hominem reply. With ironically (given your false accusation) FUD, or at least UD, no less in the face of those facts.

I'm happy to accept your offer to discuss this matter (factually, if you wouldn't mind, please) in a year and see what has changed.

In the meantime, and afterwards, I'll continue to stick with CP Scott:

...but facts are sacred

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/nov/19/historical-precedent-bonus-occupy

Ooops! "Live by the sword" etc

What's the "Oops!" part of that?

In lieu of you stating what you are actually referring to, I have to guess that you mean that CIFer's reference to the Siena College polls.

Which of the following would you prefer?

(1) the SteB1 poll defence that "it doesn't mean anything at all"
Personally, I find this rather disingenuine.

(2) a look at the actual polls themselves

There's the most recent one
http://www.siena.edu/uploadedfiles/home/parents_and_community/community_page/sri/sny_poll/SNY1111%20Crosstabs.pdf
and last month's
http://www.siena.edu/uploadedfiles/home/parents_and_community/community_page/sri/sny_poll/SNY101811%20Crosstabs.pdf

(2-a) an increase in the number of those who think there is too much media coverage of them along with a decrease in the number who think there isn't enough.

(2-b) Two-thirds believe that the protesters do not represent the 99% and only 31% think that they do represent the 99%
This is a considerable change in view from October when 58% believed they represented the 99%.

Of course, as SteB1 did correctly say, it is early days, so who knows what the future may bring. But the statements I initially made and that SteB1 contested do appear to be correct at this point in time.

Having established that, should we perhaps return to the group in Leeds at this point?

I support occupy where ever they decide to occupy they are the only thing stopping this world from becoming the dystopian nightmare so beloved of our right wing lunatics who seem to still be on the ascendancy as democracy is on the decline.

Good to see Edward de Bono getting a mention. Although I think his work declined after Achtung Baby.

Occupy Leeds - this is a message from the USA. Maybe too late for anyone to read it, but ...
I think the criticism here is very valid, but I give you kudos for having the guts to listen and take on board the criticism. The other guy - Matthew(?) too. Here is a link for you: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2011/10/how_ows_confuses_and_ignores_fox_news_and_the_pundit_class_.html?fb_ref=sm_fb_like_chunky&fb_source=home_oneline

That someone who seems to be enlightened can so easily fall into the narrative of the lazy media as well as the outright agenda-driven media to belittle people who are standing up and being counted is a warning to all of us to be aware. It's an organized pushback. Read this link and spread it: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/19/lobbying-banks-idUSN1E7AI0A420111119
The media allows us to view the world through their prism only. If people really want to know what's going on TURN OFF THE NEWS, Go visit an occupy site.

The media is as broken as the governments/corporate kleptocracy. In fact it is mostly owned by the corporate kleptocracy. The alternative media is replacing them now that mass communication is finally accessible to the people. I do thank the guardian for it's coverage in general.

Occupy Leeds - it takes courage to stand up, especially in the face of ignorance and prejudice. Especially when you are few. I salute you. Keep it up.
Remember though - we may be continents apart but we are with you. We are the many, they are the few.

Thanks for calling it out Rodladder.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2011/10/how_ows_confuses_and_ignores_fox_news_and_the_pundit_class_.html?fb_ref=sm_fb_like_chunky&fb_source=home_oneline

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/19/lobbying-banks-idUSN1E7AI0A420111119

Thanks for the American input thinice - amazing and optimism-generating, the way we hook-up globally now. All best M

I'm wondering what lessons LCC could learn from all this. (apropos SteB1 "flexible solutions to problems)

Hey Martin -thanks, that's very gracious of you. And thank you Guardian, you are getting a bit of a following over here for your coverage - more plugged in and connected than our own. Strange days indeed ;)