OWS: It's not anti-capitalism, it's anti-greed

reply to post by Jason88


Hate to say this, but you are wasting your time. Those of us that are willing to listen and understand what OWS stands for, already know that this movement is actually about returning America to a truly free-market capitalistic society.

It is the fault of OWS for not refining that message, but I guess it's just fuel for the naysayers.

Good luck with your thread and I hope you brought something to keep the trolls at bay!

Originally posted by ShogunAssassins
reply to post by beezzer

 

If anyone takes a look at beezers posting history... Its pretty clear what is supported.

Yup.
Smaller government.
Personal responsibility.
Free market system.
Individuality.

Feel free to browse.

reply to post by ShogunAssassins


I hate to break it to you but never in this United States of America be it Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, or any of the fine men that helped to establish the USA. Do you really think they were equal to the average American? Equality is a joke as there is no such thing as equality. I hate to be the one to break that point to you but no one is equal.


You said take a look at Beezers posting history. well just based on your posting history in this forum I would speculate that you enjoy fanning flames and just being contradictory to anyone you oppose without actually establishing an argument.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by madhatr137

 

Yeah ok but the ism where everyone is a winner ain't working out so well.

Please enlighten me as to what exactly that -ism that you keep referring to, in a context that implies it is constant and currently ongoing, is; because I look out at the world and see a world in which the entire sociology-economic and political systems are gamed by and for the advantage of but a few who seem to be hellbent on consolidating everything, power/wealth/resources, for themselves.

I don't see a world of "everybody winning".

I see a world of a few winning and everyone else being thrown the scraps, and being expected to like it that way.

reply to post by madhatr137


What do you think 145 million americans sole existence come's from this governement? that ain't capitalism they are consuming more wealth that those who are producing it.

reply to post by Phantom28804


Ironic yes.

So I made a new thread to discuss this issue.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by Phantom28804


It's simple deflection. When their ideology cannot be validated by reasoned debate, turn to the person rather than the topic.

Originally posted by ShogunAssassins
reply to post by Phantom28804

 

The quotation "All men are created equal" has been called an "immortal declaration", and "perhaps" the single phrase of the United States Revolutionary period with the greatest "continuing importance". Thomas Jefferson first used the phrase in the Declaration of Independence as a rebuttal to the going political theory of the day: the Divine Right of Kings. It was thereafter quoted or incorporated into speeches by a wide array of substantial figures in American political and social life in the United States. The final form of the phrase was sylized by Benjamin Franklin.

DAMN SOCIALISTS!

Do a little more reading of Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson. They are about as anti-socialist as any two men could possibly get. In fact, they may be the opposite of socialist.

"I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I traveled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer." --Benjamin Franklin, On the Price of Corn and Management of the Poor, 1766

"A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government." Thomas Jefferson

"Dependence begets subservience and venality, suffocates the germ of virtue, and prepares fit tools for the designs of ambition." Thomas Jefferson

There are literally hundreds of Founding Father quotes that relate very anti-socialist sentiment.






"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do."
Benjamin Franklin on OWS

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by loveguy

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Jason88

 

Nice, but not true. I've had debates here, on ATS, where the OWS proponents called for an end to capitalism.

Period.

You may not think so, but there are countless ppeople at these events, and here on ATS, who espouse the end of capitalism.

Personally, I wish to call an end to the concept of debt/compensation for any services rendered by anybody anywhere.

99% of us are willing to forgive debt. 1% is not.

Whatever the true stat, it's not a 50-50 down the middle arrangement by far.

So an end to the free market. Capitalism.

This is what I'm talking about! This is what I can never support.

How can something that doesn't exist come to an end.

There are no free markets anywhere.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by madhatr137

 

What do you think 145 million americans sole existence come's from this governement? that ain't capitalism they are consuming more wealth that those who are producing it.

The 145 million Americans whose "sole existence comes from this government"?
Oh, do you mean the 47% of Americans who "don't pay any taxes"? You must, because 145 million would be about 47% of the US population...

I didn't realise 47% of the American population, who pay "no" taxes were unemployed and didn't have to pay sales tax...(which would imply that those 47% are in Red States, because there are no Blue States that don't have sales tax)...wait, that's not what you're saying at all.

Originally posted by loveguy

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Jason88

 

Nice, but not true. I've had debates here, on ATS, where the OWS proponents called for an end to capitalism.

Period.

You may not think so, but there are countless ppeople at these events, and here on ATS, who espouse the end of capitalism.

Personally, I wish to call an end to the concept of debt/compensation for any services rendered by anybody anywhere.

99% of us are willing to forgive debt. 1% is not.

Whatever the true stat, it's not a 50-50 down the middle arrangement by far.

Why in the world would anyone work hard if there was no compensation for services? There are many things I've done for extra income that I would not have done if there was no compensation involved.

reply to post by madhatr137


I have seen the 47% of citizens don't pay taxes but does this include children, stay at home moms and retirees? I think it does. According to Quickfacts:
under--------18 = 24%
over--------- 65 = 13%
soccer moms ----= 2%
TOTAL --------- = 39%

Prisoners and the unemployed don't pay taxes either while some under 18 and some over 65 do. Over all that 47% tha neo like to throw around looks fudged.

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by ShogunAssassins
reply to post by beezzer

 

If anyone takes a look at beezers posting history... Its pretty clear what is supported.

Yup.
Smaller government.
Personal responsibility.
Free market system.
Individuality.

Feel free to browse.

Ha!
Yep, I've noticed you as a rational voice who does advocate those things, beezzer. I do hope ATS folks take the advice to look through your posts.
But I think it was supposed to be another personal attack. From a pro OWS guy? no way! Never saw that before.
Ah well

Yeah.... I'm not convinced its isn't anything but a Anti-capitalist movement. You also have this guy



I have no problem with the protesters, their allowed to do it. I do not support them or their message however.

Fortune favors the bold!

The mad and delusional belief that greed can somehow be legislated away is pure folly. Our societies today have become this memeplex of strange and contradictory ideas, as if contradictions hold some truth in reality. In reality, there are no contradictions, and when confronted with a contradiction it is best to investigate the situation, first by reassessing the premise.

Greed is neither good, nor bad, it is simply that compulsion to have more. Greed inspires ambition, and ambition leads to achievements not imagined in a mundane world. We as individuals are far more powerful than most are willing to concede, because in the end, it is not other people's power most fear so much, it is their own that scares the crap out of them.

Self-interest is not a crime...no where near a crime. The meme disrespecting selfishness, turning that word into a modern day pejorative, like some nasty virus that just will not go away, persists with its annoying cough. Selfishness is defined as a chief concern for ones own interest, especially with disregard for others, and everyone unthinkingly accepts this definition, to busy to recognize the contradiction. How is disregard for others, in any ones best interest? It isn't, and for those whose chief concern is their own interest, most understand how important others are to that interest. Yet, dictionaries across the glob continue to print this inexplicable contradiction as a definition for selfishness.

Why does this meme exist? This cultural idea that acting in ones own interest generally means disregard for others? Who say's this is the truth? Is this your truth? Do you believe that the only way you can have a chief concern for your own interest is at the disregard for others? Who amongst us believes that? Those who reject this nonsensical ideology, and understand that if we do not hold a chief concern for our own interest, this only invites others to treat us with the same regard as we treat ourselves, and this does not strike me as a pro-survival move.

A true capitalist believes firmly that all people everywhere should be able to act - unimpeded by any human external force - in their own best interest, and that this phenomenon, when seen in the aggregate, produces the greatest good to the greatest amount. No one is telling anyone else what their best interest is. Everyone decides for themselves what their own best interest is and act accordingly. On the micro level, some will act honorably, others not so honorably. Some will act lawfully, some will act criminally. Some will flourish and prosper and some will fail miserably. On the macro scale, the general direction will be an upward surge, and more prosperity for all.

This means a free and unregulated market place (absent in our own economy), massive competition (rapidly depleted by the continual and steady stream of regulatory schemes imposed upon commerce), and a currency backed by real wealth where everyone can agree upon its value (as opposed to the fiat currency currently in play). Under those conditions, we would have capitalism. We do not have capitalism in the United States. What we have is corporatism. Corporatism is not capitalism.

Greed is not the problem. Creating "legal fictions" and granting them limited liability, massive tax incentives, and longevity capable of outliving generations is beyond stupid, it is asking for trouble, and this is what we have, and the corporatist just loves that there are so many out there blaming their atrocities on capitalism. Corporatist's cannot stand capitalism and will gladly do what his necessary to suppress it.

Put an end to corporatism, including our own government, (one of the largest corporations in the world) and insist that governments have few compelling reasons to intrude into market places. Let the market be free and unregulated. Remind those who cry such a thing would be a return to the days of caveat emptor that the buyer must still beware today even with all this regulation, but the buyer pays much more today, because of all this regulation.

If you do not clearly identify the problem, that problem will clearly identify you.

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux


Star!

Contempt prior to investigation.
End Corporatism not Capitalism.
Take on personal responsibility instead of pointing fingers at everyone else.
End the Fed!

That was very well written Jean Paul.
As always.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
Fortune favors the bold!

The mad and delusional belief that greed can somehow be legislated away is pure folly. Our societies today have become this memeplex of strange and contradictory ideas, as if contradictions hold some truth in reality. In reality, there are no contradictions, and when confronted with a contradiction it is best to investigate the situation, first by reassessing the premise.

Greed is neither good, nor bad, it is simply that compulsion to have more. Greed inspires ambition, and ambition leads to achievements not imagined in a mundane world. We as individuals are far more powerful than most are willing to concede, because in the end, it is not other people's power most fear so much, it is their own that scares the crap out of them.

Self-interest is not a crime...no where near a crime. The meme disrespecting selfishness, turning that word into a modern day pejorative, like some nasty virus that just will not go away, persists with its annoying cough. Selfishness is defined as a chief concern for ones own interest, especially with disregard for others, and everyone unthinkingly accepts this definition, to busy to recognize the contradiction. How is disregard for others, in any ones best interest? It isn't, and for those whose chief concern is their own interest, most understand how important others are to that interest. Yet, dictionaries across the glob continue to print this inexplicable contradiction as a definition for selfishness.

Why does this meme exist? This cultural idea that acting in ones own interest generally means disregard for others? Who say's this is the truth? Is this your truth? Do you believe that the only way you can have a chief concern for your own interest is at the disregard for others? Who amongst us believes that? Those who reject this nonsensical ideology, and understand that if we do not hold a chief concern for our own interest, this only invites others to treat us with the same regard as we treat ourselves, and this does not strike me as a pro-survival move.

A true capitalist believes firmly that all people everywhere should be able to act - unimpeded by any human external force - in their own best interest, and that this phenomenon, when seen in the aggregate, produces the greatest good to the greatest amount. No one is telling anyone else what their best interest is. Everyone decides for themselves what their own best interest is and act accordingly. On the micro level, some will act honorably, others not so honorably. Some will act lawfully, some will act criminally. Some will flourish and prosper and some will fail miserably. On the macro scale, the general direction will be an upward surge, and more prosperity for all.

This means a free and unregulated market place (absent in our own economy), massive competition (rapidly depleted by the continual and steady stream of regulatory schemes imposed upon commerce), and a currency backed by real wealth where everyone can agree upon its value (as opposed to the fiat currency currently in play). Under those conditions, we would have capitalism. We do not have capitalism in the United States. What we have is corporatism. Corporatism is not capitalism.

Greed is not the problem. Creating "legal fictions" and granting them limited liability, massive tax incentives, and longevity capable of outliving generations is beyond stupid, it is asking for trouble, and this is what we have, and the corporatist just loves that there are so many out there blaming their atrocities on capitalism. Corporatist's cannot stand capitalism and will gladly do what his necessary to suppress it.

Put an end to corporatism, including our own government, (one of the largest corporations in the world) and insist that governments have few compelling reasons to intrude into market places. Let the market be free and unregulated. Remind those who cry such a thing would be a return to the days of caveat emptor that the buyer must still beware today even with all this regulation, but the buyer pays much more today, because of all this regulation.

If you do not clearly identify the problem, that problem will clearly identify you.

one of the truest, most reasoned posts I've ever read on ATS.
Bravo, sir

All this ends the moment you take money out of politics. Make lobbying illegal and this entire problem goes away.

The definitions I'm operating from in the following commentary.



Corporatarchy: government ruled by corporations.

Oligarchy: rule by an elite class.

Independence: rule by we the people.




Personally I think the best thing that happened to OWS was a rich guy
came down and answered some questions. The worst thing was
a Marine got shot in the head.

What they should have done (spoken from the comfortable Archie Bunker recliner)
was make every sign say the same thing, "restore my uncles' retirement monies"
and then they could have amused themselves for days on end using wi-fi
to shepherd the new meme across the collective thought space.

But alas, to me, they mostly looked sleepy and angry.
Not the best combination.

If I had actually gone to OWS, or started one in my area,
of course I would have knuckled under to their framing of the situation,
and would have said "some basic level of decency is required for each individual,
if we are all to live in peace."


David Grouchy

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux


Jean Paul, thank you for replying in my thread. I have contentions and bones to pick with some of your points, but need time to refute them.

But, off the top of my head your last point,

If you do not clearly identify the problem, that problem will clearly identify you.

Reminds me of a quick story. Nancy Pelosi was running for speaker of the US House of the Representatives, and was viewed as a California liberal by the right. The left re-worked her messaging to paint her as a hard working, non-privileged product of Baltimore, her hometown. It stuck. And during the election cycle the right never ousted that leftist created ideology of her (today it's different of what we know/think of Pelosi). My point and yours lay with the fact if you don't take charge of your position others will for you.

Edit: That's important to OWS because of winter, the deadline everyone expects will disperse the crowds; to survive, this movement it must make some clear directives and focus-in on core principals while not allowing the talking heads to define OWS while it's away during the cold and snow.