[IronBeer]

Tangentially related, but seems like as good a time as any to throw this in:
http://thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=message_to_cops

whoever wrote that is a moron with a grudge.

Eh, take it with a grain of salt. ...or several, as it were. Maddox hates pretty much everything.

[Black Wolf]

Occupy Perth had less than 200 people, and will fizzle over the summer - seriously, the Australian climate makes protesting difficult. It's always too bloody hot, and he you're out and about on the weekend, you might as well go to the beach, especially since there's a lot less wrong here than in other places.

Worldwide, well, mobilizing the left has historically been pretty damned hard since the sixties... I could see this having an impact on some upcoming elections like in France, but I doubt it'll be enough to save Obama next year.

[Mars]

The republican line up might be. 

[Unknown Target]

Damn hippies murdered social progression. I still don't really see this as a leftist movement though; I see it as a very general one.
I'm interested to see how long these "Occupations" last once winter hits.

[NGTM-1R]

The republican line up might be. 

Yeah, all these endless debates have really exposed is the fact that this is the party of idiots.

[JCDNWarrior]

The republican line up might be. 

Yeah, all these endless debates have really exposed is the fact that this is the party of idiots.

I hope you're not suggesting debating makes one a idiot That spells a lot of trouble for forum goers across the world.

I think the GOP debates, if that's what you mean, are very entertaining and bring up some serious issues at last. At the start it was a total dog and pony show, that was painful to watch. "What's your favorite sports team" and stuff.

Back to Occupy, the problem that occurs when people protest their lost jobs, cut wages and the many layoffs, is that they do not have much of an answer themselves. Many people that have gathered simply want things to improve. This is dangerous when people that take a leadership position 'speaking for the crowd' uses the energy and desire of the crowd to gain power or some kind of agenda that only benefits a few. The calls for global governance, socialism, marxism, and so on are, I believe, caused by this occurring.
When people start to understand that they themselves have to be leaders and individually start to look for answers, come up with a plan and then meet with like minded individuals to protest or come with a well made counter offer, that I believe this will work better.
At this moment though it can lead to a mob rule kind of thing, where 51% of the crowd votes to tax the other 49% or something.

Not sure what will happen at the end of all this. I do commend that people are actually in the streets now, even if they don't know what is truly wrong and how to fix it.

[Mars]

The republican line up might be. 

Yeah, all these endless debates have really exposed is the fact that this is the party of idiots.

I hope you're not suggesting debating makes one a idiot That spells a lot of trouble for forum goers across the world.

I think the GOP debates, if that's what you mean, are very entertaining and bring up some serious issues at last. At the start it was a total dog and pony show, that was painful to watch. "What's your favorite sports team" and stuff.

Back to Occupy, the problem that occurs when people protest their lost jobs, cut wages and the many layoffs, is that they do not have much of an answer themselves. Many people that have gathered simply want things to improve. This is dangerous when people that take a leadership position 'speaking for the crowd' uses the energy and desire of the crowd to gain power or some kind of agenda that only benefits a few. The calls for global governance, socialism, marxism, and so on are, I believe, caused by this occurring.
When people start to understand that they themselves have to be leaders and individually start to look for answers, come up with a plan and then meet with like minded individuals to protest or come with a well made counter offer, that I believe this will work better.
At this moment though it can lead to a mob rule kind of thing, where 51% of the crowd votes to tax the other 49% or something.

Not sure what will happen at the end of all this. I do commend that people are actually in the streets now, even if they don't know what is truly wrong and how to fix it.

No. He was suggesting that the Republican party (particularly the leadership) is full of swindlers and nicompoops.

No, the point of the movement is not to have an answer, it's to starkly announce that something was intolerable. If the world worked in such a way that people needed to have a fully thought out answer to call out something as unjust, we wouldn't have a supreme court for example. The point of congress is to represent the people, those people are making the statment that their interests, and in fact, the vast majorities interests, are not being represented. Congress is SUPPOSED to be there to work out the details of fixing that.

Tell me JDNC, what would happen if we became a <GASP> 'socialist' social democracy that hasn't happened as a country that's run off of nearly pure, capitalist pigfat?

[karajorma]

Yes but how is the Occupy movement actually making that statement when say the tea party or even the KKK could join their protest without actually saying anything contrary to their stated goals?

[JCDNWarrior]

The republican line up might be. 

Yeah, all these endless debates have really exposed is the fact that this is the party of idiots.

I hope you're not suggesting debating makes one a idiot That spells a lot of trouble for forum goers across the world.

I think the GOP debates, if that's what you mean, are very entertaining and bring up some serious issues at last. At the start it was a total dog and pony show, that was painful to watch. "What's your favorite sports team" and stuff.

Back to Occupy, the problem that occurs when people protest their lost jobs, cut wages and the many layoffs, is that they do not have much of an answer themselves. Many people that have gathered simply want things to improve. This is dangerous when people that take a leadership position 'speaking for the crowd' uses the energy and desire of the crowd to gain power or some kind of agenda that only benefits a few. The calls for global governance, socialism, marxism, and so on are, I believe, caused by this occurring.
When people start to understand that they themselves have to be leaders and individually start to look for answers, come up with a plan and then meet with like minded individuals to protest or come with a well made counter offer, that I believe this will work better.
At this moment though it can lead to a mob rule kind of thing, where 51% of the crowd votes to tax the other 49% or something.

Not sure what will happen at the end of all this. I do commend that people are actually in the streets now, even if they don't know what is truly wrong and how to fix it.

No. He was suggesting that the Republican party (particularly the leadership) is full of swindlers and nicompoops.

No, the point of the movement is not to have an answer, it's to starkly announce that something was intolerable. If the world worked in such a way that people needed to have a fully thought out answer to call out something as unjust, we wouldn't have a supreme court for example. The point of congress is to represent the people, those people are making the statment that their interests, and in fact, the vast majorities interests, are not being represented. Congress is SUPPOSED to be there to work out the details of fixing that.

Tell me JDNC, what would happen if we became a <GASP> 'socialist' social democracy that hasn't happened as a country that's run off of nearly pure, capitalist pigfat?

I agree with you on most accounts, especially the explanation about the Republican party being swindlers and nicompoops.
It's that the risk of people's anger and disillusion towards the establishment could be co-opted and abused by those with less honorable intentions because of the herd mentality kicking in.
As such it's hard to say if any mass-movement will be able to do much more than send a particular message, which Occupy indeed has done really well, and I enjoy seeing that. the Tea Party is similar in that regards.

However, I don't think it's so much pure capitalism that's the problem, rather than crony capitalism mixed with corporatism, to the point that corporations almost become the government with their lobbying powers (recent establishment of the 'Super Congress' may make that worse). Pure capitalism and free market is something that hasn't been practised for a long time now (if at all?).

Socialism is not bad per say but the kind that's been called for means a massive redistribution of wealth and possibly the destruction of the middle class rather than the expected idea of billionaires being taxed (Most are off-shore anyway). That's the type I disagree with. It may work well when you're not in the middle of a recession/doubledip recession/depression (according to some) with a massive deficit to deal with.

In the end I suppose it's best to wait and see what will happen.

[The E]

However, I don't think it's so much pure capitalism that's the problem, rather than crony capitalism mixed with corporatism, to the point that corporations almost become the government with their lobbying powers (recent establishment of the 'Super Congress' may make that worse). Pure capitalism and free market is something that hasn't been practised for a long time now (if at all?).

I think you do not know what capitalism is.

[MP-Ryan]

I think you do not know what capitalism is.

Socialism is not bad per say but the kind that's been called for means a massive redistribution of wealth and possibly the destruction of the middle class rather than the expected idea of billionaires being taxed (Most are off-shore anyway). That's the type I disagree with. It may work well when you're not in the middle of a recession/doubledip recession/depression (according to some) with a massive deficit to deal with.

I'm pretty sure he doesn't know what socialism is, either.

[Grizzly]

Back to Occupy, the problem that occurs when people protest their lost jobs, cut wages and the many layoffs, is that they do not have much of an answer themselves. Many people that have gathered simply want things to improve. This is dangerous when people that take a leadership position 'speaking for the crowd' uses the energy and desire of the crowd to gain power or some kind of agenda that only benefits a few. The calls for global governance, socialism, marxism, and so on are, I believe, caused by this occurring.

But so are the calls to ****ing everything. Including the calls for less goverment etc. The entire tea party is based on what you just said.

When people start to understand that they themselves have to be leaders and individually start to look for answers, come up with a plan and then meet with like minded individuals to protest or come with a well made counter offer, that I believe this will work better.

Nothing new here - But not that it is going to work in the US with its current party system.

At this moment though it can lead to a mob rule kind of thing, where 51% of the crowd votes to tax the other 49% or something.

I am pretty sure that JCDN does not understand how democracy works 0_o.

Not sure what will happen at the end of all this. I do commend that people are actually in the streets now, even if they don't know what is truly wrong and how to fix it.

Its probably due to poor education.

[deathfun]

Capitalism
   An economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit.

Socialism
    A political and economic theory of that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated...
    (in Marxist theory) A transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of communism.

Democracy
    A system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.


I'm not really saying much, I just saw a whole bunch of "you don't know what x is" so I felt compelled to post definitions

[Aardwolf]

Socialism
    A political and economic theory of that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the people, or the state

You left out the end of that definition. Something like this, ya?

[karajorma]

Not to mention including that transitional state bollocks.

[Mars]

Socialism: "an ideology the rejects individualism, private ownership,and private profits in favor of a system based on economic collectivism, governmental, societal, or industrial-group ownership of the means of production and distribution of goods, and social responsibility." Hayek, Friedrich. The Road to Serfdom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1956 - Definition used in Understanding Politics, Eight Edition, though it's clearly from an anti-socialist source, the definition is pretty sound.

"any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods" “socialism” Merriam Webster, accessed October 20th, 2011, http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism

Not to mention including that transitional state bollocks.

"a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done" Merriam Webster, accessed October 20th, 2011, http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism

[karajorma]

Yes but it also implies that a socialist state can't be stable. Just cause Marx said it, doesn't mean it is correct.

Besides, the labels mean very little anyway except to people incapable of understanding them. America is a socialist state in many ways (medicare, welfare, etc) and pretty much every communist state has always been capitalist to some degree.

Whenever someone talks about how communism, capitalism or socialism is evil, you can be sure they don't have a clue what it actually is.

[Mars]

Yes but it also implies that a socialist state can't be stable. Just cause Marx said it, doesn't mean it is correct.

Besides, the labels mean very little anyway except to people incapable of understanding them. America is a socialist state in many ways (medicare, welfare, etc) and pretty much every communist state has always been capitalist to some degree.

Whenever someone talks about how communism, capitalism or socialism is evil, you can be sure they don't have a clue what it actually is.

This is actually quite true from my understanding, and labels are really convenient things for people to either worship or despise. I think everyone is guilty of that to some degree; I dislike Ayn Rand's philosophies without actually reading any of her work, simply as a reaction to how I see her ideology represented in people I know. I am making an unfounded assumption there, and when I think about it I know that, but I still speak without thinking sometimes.

[Mikes]

Capitalism
   An economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit.

You forgot... "Which, if unchecked, tends to continually redistribute wealth to the top until it allows the people on the top to wield enough power to marginalize whatever political system is in place".
Many people simply overlook that a capitalistic economic system is not stable, but rather continually evolves...  and the end result of that evolution is always a concentration of wealth and power in fewer and fewer hands until a very few "players" have defacto unlimited power over the rest of the "participants" in the system.

I.e.: the problem that so many Americans just don't get (or deliberately ignore) in a nutshell: Unregulated Capitalism is quite detrimental to Democracy.


With both capitalism and democracy being rooted in core American values this leads us to the hilarious paradox that no matter where you stand in the discussion you can always call whoever disagrees with you "Anti American!".

[redsniper]

Americans are anti-American!