Occupy Wall street, we are witnessing social revolution.

reply to post by LeSigh


Selective communism is fascism though, isn't it? I try, every now and then, to less be inflammatory as it always bites me in the ass after.

I agree with much of what you said in your post except that I do believe that one day we can achieve anarchism or communism, both of which have worked on smaller scale (tribal). I see your point about dissenters but again using the tribal example, dissenters tended to go off and form their own tribes. It's a pretty big planet. It may be idealistic but shouldn't we have ideals and goals to work toward? You could turn out to be correct but a lot of good things can happen along the way.

Communism, Socialism, and Capitalism are all lowest common denominator.
Who says we need to fall in line with any of these systems
How about we create a new one, one that everyone will love. One based on peace. A new world order, so to speak ( a good one)

reply to post by seabag


Collectivism is not the answer to our world's financial problems, at least not the atheist china and russian model which had proven failure where unfettered greed is universal in that society for ages.

Collectivism by the protestant american democratic agarian society had worked in the past when the nation started. Many of those farmers were given lands in the vast holdings, and that's about it. They formed up communities, of militias to protect, provided education, shared funds to build roads, lobbied for gov to build railways to their towns to catch the economic boom. In that State independence, they would be considered a collective working for their own general good.

But USA had grown beyond a mere agarian society, and had progressed even to outer space. It calls for better management of the nation. Capitalism had been the avowed system from the start.

But what we see today is NOT capitalism, but only facism whereby the strong denies opportunities to others to eradicate competition, with same CEOs sitting in similar Corporations around the world, dictating how wealth is to be distributed, which is that the bulk of it goes into their own pockets.

Collectivism failed, capitalism subverted, facism abhorred. So what's the answer?

Equal Opportunity within level playing fields.

Every citizen must be given the opportunity to excel. It is opportunity in life that seperates a goat herder from an executive officer. Not every person has opportunities, let alone equal ones in life. Some believed that meritocracy will help. But without opportunity to excel, to prove one's merits, more so when the labour market is often pyramid shape where opportunities get lesser at the top, meritocracy too is a failure for the many.

Only our leaders can create opportunities, through social expenditures such as education, infrastructure, etc, as well as find fair trade ( NOT FREE TRADE ) with other nations, whereby wealth can be generated fairly and not lopsided such as given away tech knowledge and sacrificing one's workers for foreign slave labour as the corporations had done in China.

No society can exist if everyone is a PHD, or everyone is a waiter. Fortunately, each human has an unique or several talents that can contribute to society, and not all talents are the same. Thus each and every human must be given and allowed opportunities to use and grow such talents. Some are good at research, some love to heal, some love to help, some love to work with machines, some love to create, etc.

Most critically is that each be allowed sustainable wages, as dictated by market forces, and not by the hands of the few. If everyone in a nation is a PHD in science servicing the world except for one who is good at car repair, how much should that mechanic be paid? Can we say he should be paid lesser than the PHD guy, or be allowed to have a reasonable wage to commisurate with his time and efforts serving society?

No human wishes to be lazy. For a few days perhaps, but humans get bored easily, or will be forced to work if he wants to eat. However, if he has no opportunities in life, or with wages that cannot sustain at least a basic meaningful life, then laying in a couch all day is what he will day and rot, or join in a protest to seek for a community fair balance.




.

The propagandists for World Socialism are working O/T on this thread. As I have already said over and over here, Marx and Lenin both stated that the revolution would still employ a "dictatorship of the proletariat" in which the Elite still would rule over everything. Karl Marx died a pauper because he was a dreamer and spent all his time theorizing about how to get resources from the wealthy. That is how his theories of income redistribution came about.

Here's a clue. The State is not going to wither away leaving the entire collective of the proletariat in charge. The rulers of the State will still tell everyone what to do, where to do it, and how to do it. In other words you will still be slaving away while someone else is running your life. Sound fun?

reply to post by SeekerofTruth101


You seem like you know something.
I think you would be interested in learning about Meritocracy ,
Meritocracy is the way to go. Our governments would be filled with people who are competent and capable of doing it, rather than rich scumbags in it for a dollar. Same with the banks and corporations. They would be run by the competent, instead of the rich who only want more money for themselves and their sister companies. They would be publicly liable for any and all wrongdoing, transparency at its finest would be employed within everything so that there are no excuses.

A level playing field for everyone, instead of the super rich having -all- of the opportunities they desire. Look at the CEOs of all the major companies in the world. And then look at their education. Then look at their family. 9 times out of 10 that person had a rich family and got to go to the best private schools and the best universities/colleges. Had the connections to get a high paying job right away and immediatly can get into government without even trying.

Fair? Absolutely not.
All the prestigious jobs are held by the wealthy elite. Be it government or globalist corporations or even some non-globalist ones. Next to no one from the 99% could ever possibly do that. No one from the 99% could ever gain as much power as the ones that have been in control since the end of the napoleonic wars (ill go as far as there, the rabbit hole goes much deeper, but its not relevant right now).

reply to post by RadioactiveRob


This revolution happened under the Obama regime. Wait and see what will happen in the next presidency election. If Obama is re-elected, expect a resurgence of the OWS movement again. If you have a new president then expect something bigger or smaller. I dunno, just wait and see!!!

Occupy is one big extended Rainbow Gathering. Anyone who has been to a Rainbow Gathering or----unluckily----a seed camp for a Gathering will know what I'm talking about. You can advertise the most wonderful, hippie-filled Utopian event, have basic rules for respect for each other, a peer-chosen Council to settle disputes fairly, communal meals and supplies, and they will will still eff it all up. By the end of your stay, you will have witnessed fights, theft, greed, fear-mongering, us-vs-them, and flat-out oppression of one another through social cliques (anyone recognize the "hand signals" of Occupy?) and public shaming. Add on top of that the people who show up because they're drifters in the first place and see an opportunity to be fed and entertained on someone else's dime for a week or two, and you get disaster.

What both are lacking is real leadership. I witnessed a seed camp that had a very charismatic and alpha-male leader, and it worked great, our camp fed everyone three meals a day and no one slept in the cold-----until they got bored and decided to literally lynch a guy they didn't like. And that's the problem----the majority of Rainbow Gatherers and Occupiers are good people who work hard and want to change the system for the better. The rest of them are layabouts, anarchists or Mussolinis, and they have great power over the entire tone of the camp or movement. They get the attention and set the agenda.

If Occupy can find a real leader with altruistic goals in mind and who has more powerful charisma than anyone else, they might go somewhere. Right now, with the leaderless organization of the movement, they're just milling about. Hopefully real leaders will come soon.

Originally posted by Skywatcher2011
reply to post by RadioactiveRob

 

This revolution happened under the Obama regime. Wait and see what will happen in the next presidency election. If Obama is re-elected, expect a resurgence of the OWS movement again. If you have a new president then expect something bigger or smaller. I dunno, just wait and see!!!

If anyone but ron paul is elected, there will be a critical mass in america where not only is OWS going to make a complete resurgence, stronger than ever. I suspect they will team up with every other group in america. No matter what actually.
Any and all people are welcome,
Militias are ready to defend the people
Oathkeepers are ready to defend the people
We need to break the hold of the mainstream media. We need to help people open their eyes. I cannot wait for the truth drop. There has been a lot of truth drops lately, some of which has been released by Wikileaks actually (keep an eye on wikileaks, i have a feeling..).

, This is the year for change. This corrupt system is going to be cleansed. We will start anew and will accelerate ourselves into a galactic civilization. We have the capabilities. With the suppression of technologies that has happened in last.. long time, and the release of these tech's, we will finally be able to do things we couldn't even fathom right now. I think its coming personally, let them do what they please, they are just death throws right now. TPTB are drowning right now, awareness of them and their activities has spiked since last year, and its going to come to a close soon. Not everyone is a sheep, one must consider that there are some non-sheep in government, politics, military, pentagon, whitehouse, etc, that are collaborating to end this, its only logical. Not everyone can be bought with fake dollars.

reply to post by 00nunya00


The leaders will appear some day soon. I agree, a leaderless movement is good for what it is. You cannot kill it because you cannot attack and sever the head. I get the point of it. But they do need a leader, or perhaps a series of leaders depending on what kind of structure they set up.

Think of the winter as.. plotting. That is what is good about young mind and ideas, they are subject to change and learn from their mistakes. The winter is a grace period for the status quo, while the young ones plot and mend their mistakes. I think a leader or a few leaders will come out of the pack, but it would be extremely dangerous to do so, they would be putting their lives at risk. They are that much of a threat, yes.

reply to post by SeekerofTruth101


I agree with you 100% when you state…

No society can exist if everyone is a PHD, or everyone is a waiter. Fortunately, each human has an unique or several talents that can contribute to society, and not all talents are the same. Thus each and every human must be given and allowed opportunities to use and grow such talents. Some are good at research, some love to heal, some love to help, some love to work with machines, some love to create, etc.

But you lose me when you say…

Most critically is that each be allowed sustainable wages, as dictated by market forces, and not by the hands of the few. If everyone in a nation is a PHD in science servicing the world except for one who is good at car repair, how much should that mechanic be paid? Can we say he should be paid lesser than the PHD guy, or be allowed to have a reasonable wage to commisurate with his time and efforts serving society?

This talk of a “sustainable wage” or “living wage” is liberal-speak. Who is to decide these acceptable wages…Government? The market does currently dictate wages but when you speak of “sustainable wages” you are appealing to some outside force (government) to set this wage level.

When the founders of US said “all men are created equal” this in no way means all men should make the same wage. President Thomas Jefferson said, “All men are by nature equally free and independent. Such equality is necessary in order to create a free government. All men must be equal to each other in natural law.” Jefferson was referring to equality in natural law. This meant that elites should not be treated differently than the common man with regard to protections granted by the constitution.

Government has no right to dictate the wages an employer pays its employees. People earn what they earn based on the skills and talents they possess as dictated by market forces, not based on some government authority or some fantasy utopian world system of collectivism certain people yearn for. People have the right to seek different employment within the same field if they don’t like the wage they are currently being paid. People are also free to improve their skills or education and seek higher paying employment elsewhere.

All men’s "wages" are not equal nor protected by the constitution…never have been and never should be.

Originally posted by trust_no_one
reply to post by PaxVeritas

 

anywho to the OP, communism is not the solution to the troubles in our current system, there is reason they lost the cold war.

What are you talking about? There has never been a real communist government. They were/are all Dictatorships.

reply to post by RadioactiveRob


These things take time to work themselves out.
There will not be any changes overnight, because humans are slow to change and slow to accept changes.

The old Kubler Ross Model applies well here to a country as well.

Stages

Denial — There is nothing wrong with our country and its system

Anger — How dare anyone speak out against the way things are being run!

Bargaining — There must be a way to reason with those speaking out!

Depression — What happened to the Good Old Days? What happened to this country?

Acceptance — The system we have in place is not working out for majority of this countries citizens.

It could take 10 years for these stages to come to completion.

Originally posted by jacobe001
reply to post by RadioactiveRob

 

These things take time to work themselves out.
There will not be any changes overnight, because humans are slow to change and slow to accept changes.

The old Kubler Ross Model applies well here to a country as well.

Stages

Denial — There is nothing wrong with our country and its system

Anger — How dare anyone speak out against the way things are being run!

Bargaining — There must be a way to reason with those speaking out!

Depression — What happened to the Good Old Days? What happened to this country?

Acceptance — The system we have in place is not working out for majority of this countries citizens.

It could take 10 years for these stages to come to completion.

Scotland will do its best to give you good comedy during the next US depression!

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
The only possible way that "labor"can not be the "means of production" is if they willingly surrender their labor to employment on a collective level, and absolutely refuse to negotiate the price of their labor on an individual level.

Huh...no? It just doesn't make sense at all. In no way a collective salary can exist unless in a cooperation even then, laborers could still ask for a different price individually and even then, they still stay the means of production.

Originally posted by Jean Paul ZodeauxClass struggle exists for classes. Those who do not participate in classes do not participate in class struggle.

What the hell are you babbling about? There is no place for the word participation when we talk about classes.
It's all about living the consequences.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
Workers of the world get a clue!

I think our brains are just wired differently.

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by SeekerofTruth101

 

Government has no right to dictate the wages an employer pays its employees. People earn what they earn based on the skills and talents they possess as dictated by market forces, not based on some government authority or some fantasy utopian world system of collectivism certain people yearn for.

I disagree with you here on Markets deciding fair wages.

The "Market Forces" can be played with to benefit the elite at the expense of the rest of the population.
The elite along with their politicians have created trade agreements and open borders in order to change the supply / demand curve in their favor, causing lower pay for everyone else having to compete except for the elite at the top.

The elite at the top are outside the loop of the same market forces they exploit, because they are on each others boards, voting for higher and higher compensation, and with the help of the politicians in their pockets, they are not letting in all the talented potential CEO's in the world into the US that get paid a fraction of what US CEO's get paid.

The scenario you paint, posits that if someone can do your job cheaper and better than you, anywhere in the world, then your getting overpaid.

If the market forces were open and transparent, then we would see not only wages decrease for American's but CEO pay also going down to that of the rest of the world.

The rest of the world have no problem finding talented and brilliant CEO's to run their business's for a fraction of the cost.

reply to post by User8911

Huh...no? It just doesn't make sense at all. In no way a collective salary can exist unless in a cooperation even then, laborers could still ask for a different price individually and even then, they still stay the means of production.

This is the way Marxist dogmatists always work. One comes in and screams "the bourgeois own the means of production", and I point out that if it includes labor that this means of production is owned by the individuals who sell their labor, and the power of negotiation belongs with the individual, and them some other Marxist zealot retorts: "No! Labor is the means of production!"

What the hell are you babbling about? There is no place for the word participation when we talk about classes.

Typical of the die hard overzealous Marxist, totalitarianism and tyranny run hand in hand with "labor being the means of production", and this particular Marxist will have none of this "participation" talk, because participation implies choice, and the die hard Marxist understands that there will be no choice outside of do what "we the 99%" tell you to do or die. The die hard Marxists understands that in order for their "ideals" to work, there can be no option to opt out.

The die hard overzealous Marxist hates the individual with all his passion. He hates his own individualism and despises anyone who would dare be an individual, free and independent of any outside influence, and these Marxists will not tolerate anyone who lives by the dictate of their own conscience, insisting that all must live by the dictate of Marx's conscience.

reply to post by RadioactiveRob


Okay sir there is one thing I must point out. I agree with what you are saying, but you have mislabeled the class system of bourgeoisie. This class system is comprised of small business owners, self-employed, etc. The class system structure has been perverted into a five class system instead of the basic three class system. Yet I agree that the revolution is at hand and must be guided in the proper direction. Marx had the concept of what causes revolution down pat, but was to idealistic in his representation of what individuals will stop at to ensure fair government is instituted. As the saying goes absolute power corrupts absolutely.

reply to post by AzureSky


My good sir I am currently doing just as you suggested; and would love your insight, if you are so willing.
2nd line

reply to post by seabag


Yes, you are exactly correct in your post on wages. As soon as govt dictates wages, the market forces are no longer in full force. But we already have some govt interference with minimum wage and further degradation of the market with price floors and ceilings. But you are correct, when govt begins to dictate "sustainable wages" for everyone it's going to be communist/socialist/totalitarian. So many people lately seem to have been duped into believing the lie that govt will take care of us all if we just let them. Why haven't they learned the lessons from communist Russia?

There's going to be a rude awakening when people realize the idealistic utopian stuff they have been wanting wont be what they thought. Rather, it will be the govt dictating wages, jobs, where you can work, what housing you get to be in, etc. Obama aspires to us all living in some communist apartment living(while he and his friends have mansion homes of course, that's the part he's not telling us).

Originally posted by WiindWalker

Originally posted by PaxVeritas
Occupy Wall Street FAILED because of drivel similar to yours.

"Capitalism"?

edit on 11-2-2012 by PaxVeritas because: (no reason given)

Before you laugh at your own lie, why dont you realize that it has not failed. In many ways they may have given themselves a bad name, but failure? No way. What they are protesting IS getting through to the higher ups. It may take time to accomplish their demands but 1 by 1 you will start seeing the cookie crumble.

lol