THE STATES AREN'T SO UNITED

It's impossible right now to open any sort of tabloid or broadsheet and not catch a glimpse of the 'occupy' movement currently spreading like a bush fire throughout the world. It's far more impressive when you actually put a moments research into the topic, after typing the word 'Occupy' into everyone's favourite search engine, my screen immediately becomes flooded with videos, quotes and blogs dedicated to the current pandemic, now known as 'The 99%' in the states.

To suggest political overthrow is almost irrelevant in its matter entirely, just look what happened to Guy Fawkes; I'm sure nobody wants to be commemorated by being burnt on a fire every fifth of November, yet in actuality what is apparent is that citizens are fed up. Over the past decade or so it's evident that the bridge between rich and poor is vastly enlarging, but why? Democracy is difficult. A statement brilliant in its own effortless alliteration, yet pondering political overthrow doesn't come easy, for many of us fit into the system we and thus do not question what truly may be occurring, or rather not happening. Across the pond (albeit a very large pond) a country's very own foundations are causing it to collapse on top of its own idealised morals and ideals.

The matter as a whole is complex, and yet so very simple. To make it easier for this I've chosen to write in particular about the '#OccupyWallStreet' movement rather than the movement globally (as it has now apparently become quite a pandemic). It started roughly two months ago, with protesters massing in Zuccotti Park, New York which they then have appeared to rename 'Liberty Square' for probable obvious reasons. This becoming a humanoid generator for the movement itself amassing thousands in a camp all connected by their ideals as if conjoined to become one all adjoined by metaphoric cables allowing the ideas of all to be transported mouth to mouth and thus voiced as one in a riot of human will. To be certain, however, from what I have read there is no 'real' riot occurring here, no youths ransacking shops and stealing trainers; alas this is so far from the masses we were treated to in the UK during the summer riots, these are people all fixed on a purpose, that:

"The political system should serve all, not just the wealthy".

It's ironic that America face this episode, after all a country built on all being able to live in their 'dream' and bask in the glory of a 'free' state should have no trouble at all, surely? And yet what 'dream' has American served to it's own citizens now? One of struggle, when a family can barely afford to put food on their own table then nobody can be sharing any sort of 'dream', George Washington must be shaking in his grave (if there's much left of him). For in its basic terms America was meant to be everything England was not at the time, a place for radicals to venture and live off the land; to be free and make money from a 'ranch' and build their way up to the top of the ladder. Tell that to the thirty-thousand protesters staring up at the bankers on the top floors of the buildings of Wall Street then.

From their own website the movement itself states:

"Occupy Wall Street is leaderless resistance movement with people of many colors, genders and political persuasions. The one thing we all have in common is that We Are The 99% that will no longer tolerate the greed and corruption of the 1%. We are using the revolutionary Arab Spring tactic to achieve our ends and encourage the use of nonviolence to maximize the safety of all participants.
The #OccupyWallStreet movement empowers real people to create real change from the bottom up. We want to see a general assembly in every backyard, on every street corner because we don't need Wall Street and we don't need politicians to build a better society."

That is the difference, with no scapegoat leader; the people are as one, unified in one belief to achieve a goal set out for all to believe in. With no visible funding behind the movement itself, there is no group to be intimidated and addressed by the government, nobody to hound and remove to end this group; in fact as a whole it may only continue to get stronger and larger. With it recently being present in over 30 other cities across America, and present outside our own Saint Pauls Cathedral, the occupy disease is infecting all who understand and are affected by their ideals.

More recently, however the residents of Liberty Square were evicted by the Mayor of New York in what can only be described as an act of desperation, why evict those who are being peaceful? There is apparent panic amongst those in charge as clearly the realisation has dawned that many understand that what '#OccupyWallStreet' stands for is not untrue, and affects them too. With multiple arrests and police harming innocent members of the occupation (surprise, surprise) there is only going to be a fiery backlash to this event. No riot will take place as the members still keep to remain peaceful, for they have no reason to react to an attack of political cowardice against citizens of their own country; something that one can only describe as ridiculous. They now have chosen a new slogan after these events: 'You can't evict an idea whose time has come', fitting in the way it broadcasts the ideals of the movement itself, an idea that has simply blossomed under the addition of more members.

"We are the 99% and we are here to reclaim our democracy."

The members claim that the stock exchange has been targeted not just because of the 'bankers' crisis, something very present in the UK too, but because they see Wall Street as owning Washington. That those with money control those with power, as an example Rupert Murdoch controls nearly everything, why? Because he has power, but more importantly he has the resources through his money to control what we see and therefore believe. To shield those from what is occurring means they can never understand the true matters going on. The '#OccupyWallStreet' website described their eviction as being constructed by;

"billionaire Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s predawn raid of Occupy Wall Street at Liberty Square"

and therefore reinforces the matter they wish to uphold, that rich and poor continue to have a schism between them, and this is growing.

It's difficult on a personal level to cite an opinion on a matter so far away, especially when it mildly concerns political overthrow and rebuilding. Yet I empathise with the plight the movement is going through. Thirty-two thousand, five hundred people cannot all be false in their ideals, can they? It's true that after the recession many have been left jobless and to fend for themselves, but in the midst of this organism that is the movement, there are workers with jobs, supporting the views for this is not some sort of flower weilding hippy-march, this is a serious matter being dealt with by those who care and are affected. Too peaceful for the military to oppose, yes, but with strong reason to deliver what they believe needs to occur to progress their country. In all regards if they are wrong or right in what they are undertaking, they have certainly grasped the attention of the world and therefore have achieved the status they wished. The only real problem is that their actual motivation and point makes their intentions easy to question.

99% say the States are no longer United.

DIAMONDS IN THE ROUGH

Respect is something I've previously discussed amongst this blog, and irrespective of the matter to be respected it should be in our very human nature to at least hold a little for those around us. Every now and again though there is a contrast in how we perceive respect. Respect is given to those who deserve it, for example Remembrance Day, but also for those who overcome all adversity and still manage to pull through on top.

Luey Jacob Sharp died on the twenty-ninth of October, just two days after he entered into this world. Some may call this an insignificant life, others would disagree and say it has more significance altogether because of the short timespan involved. Meanwhile Luey's father, Billy Sharp (a striker for Doncaster Rovers) performed what can only be seen as the utmost act of remembrance for his little boy. Clearly Sharp will probably never fully recover from the loss of his child, nor will his partner, but the bravery and courage that he undertook just three days after his son's death proves that some sort of hero's do exist amongst us.

This post isn't a tribute to his son, by any means; rather it is recognition of what Sharp thought was right to do after the passing of his little boy. Sharp was courageous, at a time when courage would have failed many others for obvious reasons. Football unites people of all different walks of life, but there are times like these that really show the power of the sport with all. Regardless of his own personal heartbreak Sharp chose to play for Rovers, being given the captains armband for the match and lead his team out against Middlesbrough (and let me reiterate, just three days after the loss of Luey). He requested a minute’s applause be held in memory and as a true mark of respect for his little boy. I'm sure nobody could have imagined quite how he must have felt during this. What makes this event even more spectacular is the obligation in which both sets of fans, and players undertook this mark of respect. With every single fan in the ground standing and applauding, one can only credit sport itself for allowing such respect to be delivered.

Sharp said on his twitter:

"My goal tonight was the most important of my career dedicated to my brave boy Luey Jacob Sharp. I love you son.
"I was crying [during] the minute's applause. Thanks to both sets of fans."

Powerful.

People claim a goal can change so much for someone. It can make a day, ruin a week and certainly give the scorer a feeling of absolute euphoria incomparable with any other feeling on this planet. Therefore Sharp scoring was simply the fairy-tale ending after the seemingly unbearable horror story he had endured over the past few days. Sharp celebrated the goal by revealing a message on his shirt emblazoned with the words 'That's for you Son'; a timely reminder of a fathers undying love for his child. Usually such an action of lifting the shirt would follow with a referee brandishing a yellow card to the culprit but on the day, Darren Deadman (the man in charge) was praised by all for not doing such. It was therefore seen as fitting that Sharp could perform such an act for his son.

Yes, it is only a game of football, two teams and a ball, and yet the pure passion and emotion that was present shows the power of the sport; in the way it brings together people to commemorate and also celebrate events in life, in this case a celebration of what was a life for a very little boy. It's incredible how such a theme could completely overshadow a football match, and demand respect from all players in the game, that is definite unity in sport. With the recent allegations of racism in football this story comes as a simple reminder to all involved that although at times the sport brings out the worst in people, it can also provide the world with moments of absolute beauty; and that at times where individuals are at their lowest it can provide the support and relief to pick them up. Respect is something that should be earned; yet in this case it was deserved.

TERRY'S IN TROUBLE..

Apparently the title of being the England captain these days comes with little regard for that players action; and therefore the consequences of these actions. In this case, a certain Mr Terry is back in the headlines under an alleged 'racism row'. Even his own team mates have now failed to defend him. 'Oops' doesn't quite cover it.

To reiterate what you probably already know, Mr Terry uttered some very potty language at a mixed race player during the much heated West London derby that Chelsea recently played against Queens Park Rangers. Now, I don't personally know Anton Ferdinand, but I'm guessing he's neither 'black' nor a 'c***'? He's brown and a football player, as a matter of fact. Although in many other cases this wouldn't even be an issue, as I’m certain racism takes place a lot more than people are willing to admit in any sport; after all in the heat of a sporting moment and being under such pressure some simple minded buffoons often have no other insult to throw at another human other than to mock their ethnicity or background, step forward Mr John Terry; this was caught on camera, for once technology has supported football (much to the probable misery of a certain Sepp Blatter who believed there is no place for technology in football). A choice few television cameras caught the Chelsea captain remarking the slur and he is easily seen mouthing the words. Since the event these videos have circulated around the global web and diffused their way onto many avid sports fans computer screens.

The most shocking thing about this whole fiasco is that Terry is supposed to represent the country's football as a whole. From the teenagers in Bristol playing 'heads and volleys' on a road, to every professional player representing the Premier League, John Terry is meant to be an aspiration, something to look up to. He represents the pinnacle of English football, a leader of all within the sport of this country. I can imagine a few players that are now questioning this alleged leadership, and for very feasible reasons. Most of us know the England set up now contains an almost equal set of both black and white players, in fact in the most recent squad; ten out of the twenty-five players are of other ethnic origin and heritage. This is therefore representative of the level of multiculturalism within football today, and thus Terry citing these alleged comments simply undermines the level that English football has now achieved in regard to respect for players of all ethnic backgrounds. For football is surely about ability, not race.

Yes, he may now not deserve the captaincy of England, nor of Chelsea and in some ways it's surprising that his own players have not yet come forward about the matter. Especially after the three Queens Park Rangers players coming forward to present evidence against Terry; 'trouble' doesn't quite cover it, if found guilty Terry faces obvious fines and possible police enquiries. The main result, however will be the fact his career will be left in complete tatters; as if the previous breakthrough of his affair with the partner of former team mate Wayne Bridge was not enough, he may now have utterly plunged himself top of the list of 'most shameful' footballers in the eyes of many fans.

In all colours, shapes and views we want football to continue to be beautiful, the 'beautiful game' and yet with such individuals tarnishing it, it is almost inevitable that at the moment in time football has taken a giant leap backwards with regard to equality in the game. The worst part of it is that Terry may seem to be in trouble, but his £120,000 a week wage probably won't suffer too much. Poor lad.