Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Perhaps the Movement is Scarily Tending Toward Socialism?

Posted 13 years ago on Nov. 7, 2011, 9:47 p.m. EST by motherof4 (44)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

The Horizontal Leadership of the 99% should be careful in articulating it's goals of "equality" with the 1%, lest by natural logical extension the goal becomes a change in economic system tending towards socialism, which we've seen in dozens of examples, tends to benefit no one, lead to massive corruption and create an incentive for mediocrity.
While in our current state of affairs in the USA, there is a disparity in the very richest and the very poorest, at least everyone has the hope of bettering themselves through hard work, creativity and ingenuity. We can all point to prominent examples of self made millionaires. In many countries, these same individuals might have remained at a subsistence poverty level, strictly due to government policies. Thus, it's important to be clear about the goals of the movement and not to be perceived as expecting a redistribution of wealth or a handout. Highly successful people in the United States, for the most part, worked hard to achieve their own success and it is unfair to take "Robin Hood" type aim at those with money and simply say they must have acquired it unfairly. Not everyone in the 1% is a CEO or an investment banker. Many worked for years and years to pay off student loans. Indeed, the vaunted 1% pays a very high percentage of the taxes for the entire country.
So, rather than forcusing on the 1%, why not focus on real goals achievable in Congress? Such as making health care affordable to everyone, which has been on the table since Clinton was president. Or, passing legislation requiring full recourse against officers and directors of any institution that receives Federal bail out funds that fails to honor the repayment arrangements with respect to those funds and making it illegal to alter the terms of the repayment obligation without the approval of two thirds of both houses. Also, why not propose legislation amending Federal banking regulations such that bonuses paid to banking directors must be less than a certain proportion of the dividends paid to shareholders - or something along that line.
The point is, be specific and stay Democratic and Capitalistic. Some of your spokespeople have mentioned "not being a part of the system." For my part, the minute your movement is identified as Anarchist, I'm 100% against you. Just sayin'

77 Comments

77 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by CanEd (78) from Edmonton, AB 13 years ago

One time I went to Norway and it was just awful. Massive corruption, bread lines stretching from Oslo out to the fjords, with Th!nks full to the brim with kroner being pulled by oxen due to the battery shortage. I saw on the Norwegian equivalent of CSPAN (On a gamma ray emitting 4 inch tv which got terrible reception) the proceedings in the parliament, and the Members of the Stortinget would clap for hours after the Prime Minister gave a speech, afraid to be the first to stop. Truly a hellish dystopia.

NO SOSHULISM FOR AMERICA.

[-] 1 points by MJMorrow (419) 13 years ago

This thread is great! Thank you! [rolling on the floor laughing]

[-] 0 points by CanEd (78) from Edmonton, AB 13 years ago

Aint no thang.

[-] 1 points by motherof4 (44) 13 years ago

You know, I've heard other stories like that from friends who've visited similarly situated socialist countries. Sweden is also not the Eden we imagine it to be; socialism as a system wreaks havok. It eliminates the incentives to excel and creates massive incentives to cheat the system - since in a system of absolute equality that becomes the only way to get ahead.

[-] 1 points by CanEd (78) from Edmonton, AB 13 years ago

People seem to cheat the system quite a bit to get ahead here too.

[-] 1 points by thestruin (83) 13 years ago

the difference is in one system its supposed to be cheaters and rule-makers, working against each other, in the other they are the same people.

[-] 0 points by sensiblebystander (31) 13 years ago

Have you actually ever been to Norway? I have, I handful of times. And I have friends who live there. Your Nordic paradise is based on the same economy as Russia - oil - which you oh so hate for plundering the natural resources. Norway was one of the poorest countries in Europe because they had NOTHING until they started drilling. Now because Norwegians are content with the dole and such, and no one is having kids, they give a warm welcome to Pakistanis and Somalis to do the Norwegians' dirty work because no one wants to work. Hmm... Looks oddly familiar.

[-] 1 points by CanEd (78) from Edmonton, AB 13 years ago

I think our glorious and perfect corporate-capitalist economy is dependant on oil pretty heavily too. And I'm afraid I don't see how your argument really refutes socialism on any level. You say that Norway was poor until they found oil, but I don't see what that has to do with the economic system.

As for the vaguely racist bit with the Pakistanis and Somalis, a quick google revealed to me that the Norwegian unemployment rate is just under 4%, so it seems like people are probably working and not just leeching welfare.

[-] 1 points by sensiblebystander (31) 13 years ago

My point was that OP was glorifying Norway as paradise completely ignorant of the problems that Scandinavia faces.

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 13 years ago

I know Danes who are living here now and I've asked them these very questions - even if only possessed of only a small house, a pickup truck and a camper, it's still twice as much as they'd have in Denmark.

[-] 1 points by sensiblebystander (31) 13 years ago

OK CanEd, let's meet in Oslo for a 15EU 12 oz glass of beer poured to us by a Somali who can't speak Norwegian because a Norwegian citizen will get more from the dole than working at a pub. It is only oil that is holding up the Norwegian govt., again same as Russia. I don't know what part of my post you didn't understand. Race card is balls, I despise racism and there was nothing racist in my post if you can open your eyes for a second.

[-] 2 points by CanEd (78) from Edmonton, AB 13 years ago

I'm afraid I can't afford to fly across the ocean to argue over an expensive beer with some guy on a forum, but thanks for the offer.

The part I don't understand is how Norway being dependent on oil revenues refutes socialism. And I also don't see how so many Norwegians are living on the dole when the unemployment rate is under 4%?

Anyway, I'll admit the race bit was a bad call. Its just often reactionaries are often also racists.

[-] 1 points by sensiblebystander (31) 13 years ago

Go talk to some Norwegians. Or other Europeans. The math is simple. If you get paid 2000 EU on the dole while Starbucks is paying 5 EU an hour which one would you choose? I'm all for having a very expensive beer with you but since neither you nor I can afford to fly there we'll have to duke it out on the forum ;-)

[-] 1 points by CanEd (78) from Edmonton, AB 13 years ago

Then so it shall be. Welfare dependency is a problem, I will admit, but one proposed taxation system would solve a lot of the associated problems while reducing administrative costs and red tape.

A negative income tax, which even Milton Friedman supported, would combine all taxation and welfare into one efficient system, under which people under a certain level receive benefits, which are reduced as their income grows. People over the line would pay a graduated income tax. Thus, there would still be incentive to work hard to get more.

Just because one system doesn't work doesn't mean welfare is a fundamentally flawed idea. It just needs tweaking.

[-] 2 points by Sinaminn (104) from Sarasota, FL 13 years ago

This movement was started by people who describe themselves as Anarchists and they are very surprised by the foothold and growth this occupation strategy has attained according to some of the material I've read.

In fact I would say it has evolved past the point of an Anarchist's ideology. What I mean is that so many people from differing points of views have now aligned themselves to the vague "money out of politics" agenda that anarchy would be nearly impossible at this point unless the local police start randomly firing live rounds into the crowds.

A list of demands was circulated several weeks ago but seems to have been squashed as we don't hear about it anymore. I'm guessing it was because it had too much in common with mainstream political initiatives. The type of initiatives that spin off groups outside of OWS will now begin pressuring congress to enact on their own as they become frustrated by OWS's lack of focused agendas.

The group or individual that is playing the cards in this poker game deserves more accolades than most people realize at this point or more likely than they will ever realize.

[-] 2 points by thestruin (83) 13 years ago

I feel the sudden emergence of so many Occupy movements has little to do with original stances and ideals. So many Americans have been disenfranchised and rolled over by an economic system that doesn't respond to their input into the supply-demand cycle, while simultaneously watching as the government they elected and continue to finance actively encourages the greed and greater than thou corporations. Across the board there is a realization that these self propagating patterns of behavior have some sort of inherent logical safety lever that someone has disabled. Whether its the conservative splinters or the liberal splinters or members of the myriad tertiary political movements the consensus is that these people who let this happen require replacement at the least. It just took someone who cared enough or didn't care at all to say it out loud.

[-] 1 points by Joyce (375) 13 years ago

Fair and spot-on.

[-] 1 points by motherof4 (44) 13 years ago

I agree that the core group of individuals, which I believe there must be, deserves a great deal of credit for reminding the government of the power of the general populace to organize - even in a spontaneous loosely organized fashion - when it's simply fed up. In this case, the word that comes to my mind for this longstanding action seems to be "organic". It's like an organism that's growing and developing, and as it does so, it's unapologetically deciding what it wants to be and how it plans to achieve it. Also, it has an indeterminate lifespan. Its as if the participants are vaguely aware that announcing specific goals creates a possible end-date.

On the otherhand, if you take the time to read some of the posts by it's strongest supporters, it lacks consitency and any clear message - which is like a disease in a quasi-political organization. Eventually, if they can't distinguish themselves as somewhat logical and not in favor of overthrowing our very system of government through anarchistic means, they will be completely dismissed as fringe elements and arrested under disturbing the peace laws at the first brush against a technical violation of a local statute.

[-] 1 points by Sinaminn (104) from Sarasota, FL 13 years ago

Eventually is the key word. The longer they can hold out, the more violations of peoples First Amendment rights we see (like in Nashville, the Oakland police sweep, and the powerful denial by the local authority in Atlanta) the more momentum it seems to gain. Even if it isn't under the OWS banner; the seeds have been sown.

[-] 1 points by motherof4 (44) 13 years ago

Very true, and this is a new important chapter in American history. Hopefully, our children will learn about the violations of the demonstrator's First Amendment rights in History Class and the careful preservation of their rights in NYC. It's important stuff. I'm not sure where the momemtum will go without an articulated message, though.

[-] 1 points by RufusJFisk52 (259) 13 years ago

lets not forget 4th amendment, 5th amendment, 10th amendment, 9th amendment....pretty much all of them are gone in reality.

[-] 1 points by spflhome (41) 13 years ago

Need your help. pl. click the link and sign the petition to send the message to politicians and fix our economic problems. Need millions of signatures to get politicians attention and make this work. Here is the link:

http://www.change.org/petitions/members-of-congress-and-senators-fix-the-economy-and-balance-the-budget-now?pe=d4e

[-] 1 points by Saikron (24) from Charleston, SC 13 years ago

Some horrors of socialism: public schools, public police/fire, public roads, public libraries, public parks, public assistance for the poor, sick, elderly, and/or unemployed, etc. What a nightmare.

[-] 1 points by BizEducatedSociallyConscious (68) from New York, NY 13 years ago

I agree with you but remain confident this movement will produce fair, righteous, needed reforms and fixes. It is an open and democratic process. Anyone can join and participate. Many have expressed views of all kinds. That has been scary to me at times but I have learned and seen various perspectives. Perspectives I would genuinely like to see but havent are from 1% type people, Such as answering: "Dont you think the system can be fixed, overhauled? Arent rules and laws necessary to be followed to keep the system alive? Do you think society can continue by unfairly burdening and cheating average, hard working people? Yes, we need to reduce the debt but why not fairly and smartly? Cant you still make sufficient profits yet NOT bankrupt and collapse the entire economy? (sorry, I'm digressing)

So, yes, I agree with concern over "socialism", but feel confident those ideas can go ahead and be discussed and considered but hopefully not prevail. I am a centrist who feels major, positive changes and reforms are needed and possible. So allow some extreme views to be expressed, weigh in with your thoughts and concerns--as you have done and i have done--and people: DO NOT GET SCARED by naysayers throwing labels and instances to scare and distract. Focus on the HUGE problems and the solutions we all agree on and demand. engage, learn, be patient, be determined, be outraged.

[-] 2 points by motherof4 (44) 13 years ago

I appreciate your comments and hope that you are among those involved in the decision making process; you seem very level headed and balanced. I agree that positive change is possible and a powerful dynamic has been started. It is anyone's guess whether the tremendous potential of the OWS movement will be harnessed to it's fullest potential.

[-] 1 points by BizEducatedSociallyConscious (68) from New York, NY 13 years ago

thank you. I am not a decision maker. I am really not sure anyone is yet. It is horizontal, leaderless and there are general assemblies of groups of people following a democratic process. i do feel i can go to general assemblies but must admit i have been struggling to find freelance projects to pay rent instead. that is why I appreciate those who have committed themselves to bring attention to these matters. i have gone down to the park and walked around and talked with people. and attended rallies. and read and responded to many comments here. the next step I am carefully considering is sleeping overnight in zuccoti when it snows again. I am a little scared about that but want to test my resolve and get more involved. and as far as leaders, the movement has seemed to organically sprout other groups with their own assemblies and voices so it definitely seems to be taking a life of it's own. i am sure it is messy and laborious but it seems to be genuine and responsive.

i think this is at an early stage. when things start, perhaps the most upset, the most passionate, the most bold will initiate. i am certain as more and more join (like mothers of four :), their voices will also be heard. and no, people do NOT have to "occupy" or camp out to be a part of this (but you are welcome to). There are people from all over the country engaging. And at the large rallies, there are beautiful people from ALL ages and walks of life who are outraged yet have gleams of hope in their eyes.

If anyone reading this is a sane centrist like me, figure what you are upset about, what you want to change and do something. This movement is the greatest chance for real and positive change our country needs. It is NOT through upcoming elections...the political system is currently corrupt and unresponsive to the people. For instance, one of the TOP issues I have repeatedly heard in this movement is campaign finance reform and to get corporate money out of politics (at least control it). Until we achieve that, any democratic vote, while meaningful and patriotic, will be diluted.

[-] 2 points by motherof4 (44) 13 years ago

Well said. I completely agree with your point about campaign finance reform and think this is the key point for OWS to focus on; especially because it must be handled outside of the ordinary boundaries of the election circuit. It's the perfect banner issue for the group that pulls together the tinge of corruption flowing between big business financing government and government rewarding big business. It's also a great unifying issue in the country that pulls everyone together.

As far as joining the group versus working, you should probably work. The movement is not losing any steam in the national media based on any appearance that it's numbers are dwindling, they seem to be holding steady - so the cameras wouldn't notice whether you were there or paying your rent. Maybe check in with them during the day and see if you can do some free lance writing for them? The movement needs leaders though, maybe they'll read this comment stream and get your info : )

[-] 1 points by BizEducatedSociallyConscious (68) from New York, NY 13 years ago

Wow, you are so sweet, thank you for the advice. I really appreciate it. You really are a mother of 4! :)))

[-] 1 points by motherof4 (44) 13 years ago

You're welcome, and yes, I really am a mother of 4 (although I've been called a 'right wing plant' tonight!).

[-] 1 points by gawdoftruth (3698) from Santa Barbara, CA 13 years ago

the myth that highly successful people work hard is fascinating. in fact what the elite class IS is socialized financial bubbles, has been for 200 years. They do less than nothing for what they get and manufacture their wealth by manipulating numbers. In normal math multiplying anything by zero is zero. All of your so called "working hard" Elites work hard at nothing more than multiplying zero by some number and achieving that number instead of zero.

wall street TRADES in a CASINO. Not one bit of that trading has any useful or pragmatic or helpful effect on the rest of us and in fact by being traded so many times the end result is we the consumer inherit cost increases in strings of mark up. Derivatives. The Federal Reserve. Fractional Reserve banking. Etc. No, these people did not work hard, they just live above and outside of giant pyramid scheme con scam.

If you don't like socialism, then you should be happy to see us unsocialize the caste system.

Stay democratic? we are not democratic. Stay capitalistic? We are not capitalistic. I'm also against anarchism, but for education. Everything you have said here en totalia tells me you don't really have an understanding of political science or systems theory or what you are talking about, outside of the leftist ideology and dogma regarding those things.

Some of these ideas are very good. Don't confuse corporate oligarchy for democracy or capitalism.

[-] 1 points by motherof4 (44) 13 years ago

Do any highly successful people work hard? Are all rich people essentially thieves? At what threshold do you hold each individual culpable on a personal level, as not deserving their salary? What standards do you apply?

Just curious.

[-] 1 points by gawdoftruth (3698) from Santa Barbara, CA 13 years ago

Sure, highly successful people work. But generally speaking, no, thats for middle class or very upper middle class. "Work" is for the "working class."

By and large the vast majority of "rich " are thieves and social parasites. Frauds and Con artists. Inherited it in the family and don't work for anything. ETC. Obviously there are real exceptions to this, but the pattern is very clear.

Simply put people deserve just compensation for actual work they actually do. And nobody deserves to have unjust compensation for virtual work that nobody does. I'm all for capitalism, as a system which we have never had because of all the ways our system is crooked, I think its fine to imagine and vision a new and ethical market system- we need that.

Million dollar bonuses for con scammers? For Foreclosure agents? For wall street traders? No, they don't deserve that and haven't DONE any REAL Work.

It all goes on a case by case basis i think and is really common sense simple. If what you do is use arcane math and your position in society to in some way or another manipulate reality to make you money whilst you sit on your butt, your not working, and such a person is some kind of social parasite.

Now, how can any real human being personally perform labor and work equall to anything like billions of dollars? they can't. Millionaire maybe. Bill Gates or The recently deceased CEO of APPLE come to mind. but even there, in order for those guys to make their millions they in essence robbed thousands of other people of the just return on THEIR labor.

See? even the best of us can only realistically WORK to attain perhaps millions of dollars. Anyone whos making billions of dollars is stealing from the people who are doing all the work and not getting paid.

Double standard. lazyness is a vice if you are poor and a priveledge of caste if you are rich.

if you don't like lazyness and think our system should be capitalistic... then object to corporate oligarchy- because it ain't capitalism.

[-] 1 points by motherof4 (44) 13 years ago

Thanks for clearing that up.

[-] 1 points by energy99 (16) 13 years ago
[-] 1 points by motherof4 (44) 13 years ago

Oh no. Have you read "Animal Farm" or "Atlas Shrugged"? ; )

[-] 1 points by StevenRoyal (490) from Dania Beach, FL 13 years ago

I got it. How about instead of a Robin Hood tax, we just levy a small 0.25% tax on all stock, bond, and derivatives purchases for all people, business entities, trusts, etc. like we used to have in this country? The first $100,000 in purchases would be exempt per year.

[-] 1 points by sickmint79 (516) from Grayslake, IL 13 years ago

i agree, the movement seems to be less about ending crony capitalism and more about anti-capitalism.

[-] 1 points by MJMorrow (419) 13 years ago

Socialism is not an economic system. Are you afraid of Command Economics? So are the Chinese and the Russians! [giggle]

[-] 1 points by number2 (914) 13 years ago

Fascism needs to go but more socialism is not the answer.

[-] 1 points by TalkingHead (101) 13 years ago

Well first of all we've been a socialist country since FDR, joining the rest of the advanced world in implementing universal health care is not going turn everybody into card-carrying communists. Secondly we don't need to abandon Capitalism, but we do need a modern version of the New Deal to insure Capitalism's survival (just like it did then).

[-] 2 points by number2 (914) 13 years ago

I like your balanced answer. It needs to be much more capitalism than socialism, though.

[-] 1 points by TalkingHead (101) 13 years ago

I agree, there is actually only one piece missing, health care. That's as far as I would go (and that is going to be the biggest challenge because of cost, but health care costs are already eating budgets across the country alive, we can't do much worse)

[-] 1 points by number2 (914) 13 years ago

i think we should end the fascism in healthcare first and then see if that solves the problem. I bet it would and then healthcare would be affordable rather than free.

[-] 1 points by RufusJFisk52 (259) 13 years ago

most economists are divided on the fact that the new deal did any real long term good. Many say it helped the depression last longer than it could have. Lets also not forget about things like Wikard vs Filburn and all those insane supreme court decisions that have had a negative effect on actual freedom

[-] 1 points by TalkingHead (101) 13 years ago

Economists are always going to be divided, as are politicians and pundits on the best path forward (or even if the system needs significant changes at all). It is going to be up to the voters to decide the way we go.

[-] 0 points by motherof4 (44) 13 years ago

Just because we have social welfare programs for the needy, farm subsidies, and certain government backed investments in public corporations doesn't mean were a socialist country. But, as you said, legislating the availabilty of health care to everyone also wouldn't mean we were a socialist country (that's just a common fringe benefit we associate with socialist countries).

[-] 1 points by TalkingHead (101) 13 years ago

I love capitalism and the freedom that it gives the people. However, with pure capitalism we always end up with some version of the gilded age, with all the wealth in the hands of the few, and large segments living in poverty. And every time that happens in this country the voters right the ship just like they did in the Great Depression. The people with their votes, created Social Security, Medicare, unemployment insurance. They taxed the rich to create jobs. And it will happen again.

[-] 1 points by HitGirl (2263) 13 years ago

More like in its present state America is already suffering from massive corruption and is hurtling into Fascism. The 1%'s wealth-grab and class war has put them in the klieg lights where they didn't want to be. Too bad. Cry me a river. And you are already against OWS. I can always smell a rat and a con.

[-] 0 points by motherof4 (44) 13 years ago

I honestly can't tell whether I'm for it or againt it. Some of what I've read is alarming and I'm against, much of what I've read makes sense. The inconsistencies concern me and I basically like the United States. Sorry, I do. I wouldn't support breaking laws or throwing out Democracy or Capitalism. Period. I believe in hard work. I'm a single mother of four kids, 14, 15, 16 and 17 and I wouldn't advise any of them to drop out of school and protest for a job. I'm not a rat or a con, HitGirl, but I like to be involved in what's right, not just what's loud.

[-] 0 points by HitGirl (2263) 13 years ago

Do you think 45 million people on food-stamps is right? Do you think banks leveraging a billion dollars 20 or 40 times over is right? Do you know what happens when the investments fail and the banks don't have the 20 billion? Do you think lobbyists writing legislation is right? Do you think gutting Social Security to pay the bets of the wealthy is right? Doesn't it bother you that your kids may not live as well as you because we don't manufacture in America anymore. There is nothing wrong with hard work but that is not what it's about for the profiteers. You need to start paying attention. Stop defending the criminals.

[-] 1 points by thestruin (83) 13 years ago

of course its not right, it's not about that now, it's about taking action to fix it, and do are damndest to make sure it won't happen again. A large part of that should be removing the safety net that was put in place for companies, in order for a system like our economy to thrive it has to right itself, companies may wither, people will lose their jobs, the company will die, then a new company will come along and hire all of these skilled, seasoned employees in order to make something better. That is the part we have stalled, the part where it dies. We just handed the people that help guide the company a reward for failure, that is not right. Making a profit is the reward, our elected employees are working hard to ensure their bosses don't have to work to get that reward. Mainly because we let them get away with it.

[-] 0 points by motherof4 (44) 13 years ago

Seriously, that response is exactly what I'm talking about. Where does one even start? The OWS movement needs to decide on specific goals or the vagueness of it's complaints about the state of the economy and finger pointing randomly at rich people, bankers and politicians, eventually begins to sound like a sophomore tantrum. I could respond to each of your questions intelligently, but what would be the point? The answers are irrelevant to….everything.

My kids, and probably yours, will have a more difficult future because of the nature of the global economy. They're not just competing with the smartest kids in their highschool or their state, it's the smartest kids in Korea and Bangolore. As far as manufacturing inthe US goes, it was bound to happen; as long as things can be manufactured and shipped for half the cost outside the US, that's where it'll be done. Would you rather we pay our people $2/hour like in China?

Guess what, lobbyist have been writing legislation forever. Why is that your big issue? Focus. OWS needs a list of achievable goals or it will be written off as a fringe group of very angry hysterics.

OWS obviously has a lot of good points, but you shouldn't try to vent on people like me by calling me names like "rat" and "con". It's impolite and impolitic.

[-] 1 points by HitGirl (2263) 13 years ago

You need to lose the motherof4 bullshit name. You're a right-wing plant. Your explanations reek. "my kids deserve a harder life because we're global." What kind of mother says that? Your entire rant is defending the crooks and the one percent. You complain about "rat" and "con"? Here's my complaint: you feed us a bullshit story about who you are and then argue every right-wing corporate talking point I've ever heard Limbaugh and Beck spout while insisting my arguments are vague. The jig is up dude. Get a life and stop bothering real patriots!

[-] 1 points by thestruin (83) 13 years ago

There wasn't a statement regarding children deserving a harder life, there was a statement of fact, american children will statistically perform worse economically in school and the workplace compared to certain other nations. They will have a much better chance getting a job in the U.S. than they would overseas, even with the continuing unemployment situation. Maybe what we need is less parroting from both parties and more people actively approaching the causes of these problems. Our politicians, Our Federal Government. Our population that turns everything into a right or wrong winner take all political arena-fight.

[-] 0 points by motherof4 (44) 13 years ago

Now that is seriously funny! I guess you don't have kids yet, HitGirl, but when you're a mother you'll know that realism comes with the job. And, I'm not ranting (or a dude, I'm giggling as I type this), in fact I don't follow any of those right wing folks, nor you might be interested to know do I even watch any t.v. I have no motivation whatsoever to lie and I find it really amusing that the fact that someone who disagrees or pushes back against your rhetoric leads you to conclude that person must be a "right wing plant"!! I'm laughing again! Too much. Is the world really that black and white to you? How young are you??

[-] 0 points by HitGirl (2263) 13 years ago

motherof4 = fail. Please don't address me again. You are TRANSPARENT!

[-] 1 points by AlexQld (10) from Darling Heights, QLD 13 years ago

Unlike subsidies to farmers which are a clear part of National Socialism

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 13 years ago

meh

health care is good

[-] 1 points by energy99 (16) 13 years ago

Capitalism is failing in America. Might as well give socialism a try

[-] 1 points by motherof4 (44) 13 years ago

Perfectly fair opinion to hold, I'm just wondering if that is the OWS position. I'm vague on that, it seems many of the vocal supporters agree with you, but obviously that is a VERY large position to take. So, if that's the group's official position, I'd like to be clear on that, because I think that's a tad divisive.

[-] 1 points by number2 (914) 13 years ago

I support a primarily capitalist system. but we can't let the banks do whatever the hell they want without any regulations.

[-] 1 points by energy99 (16) 13 years ago

People are starting to take to the streets. There is need for leadership with clearly defined goals

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 13 years ago

Why do I get the impression I'm sitting in a political science class here? Where all are deliberating the pros and cons of various socioeconomic categories?

This is a machine, no matter our attempt to define it... it lives beyond all human ability.

And it exists for one reason and one reason only: in Russia abortion IS "birth control"; really, women can't even get condoms in that country. No one in America has EVER been willing to live that way.

[-] 1 points by motherof4 (44) 13 years ago

The point isn't "Are we going to convert to socialism in the United States?" Clearly, we are not. The question at hand is whether the OWS movement is veering toward a socialist stance in it's lack of defined goals and its vague Robin Hoodesque complaints.

To the extent some participants favor socialism, that is a personal preference, but it is a losing proposition. If OWS as a group fails to distance itself officially from that element, it will likely fail to achieve it's more reasonable economic goals and be dismised as radical.

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 13 years ago

The socialism most often referred to here is what I would label "state socialism." :) and I think you need to look at this word, "solidarity," not so much in definition as in connotation.

[-] 0 points by seaglass (671) from Brigantine, NJ 13 years ago

"not being a part of the system." They mean that in the same way that the American colonies did in 1776. Remember," No Taxation without representation? " Right now the Pols don't seem to represent anyone but the top 1% or so of the population and their Stock Corps.

[-] 0 points by motherof4 (44) 13 years ago

Are you "Throwing out the baby with the bathwater"? It's as if a tipping point was passed and everyone has just lost their ability to think logically within our system of government. Surely, you can look at hundreds of truly great things about our system of government that would make you not want to work solely outside of it? Which is not to say that the right to demonstrate is not an important right in our country, but my point is that the ultimate goals should be achievable within our system, not vague nebulous desire's for individual betterment.

[-] 1 points by GarnetMoon (424) 13 years ago

Our system is the problem...

[-] 0 points by seaglass (671) from Brigantine, NJ 13 years ago

The system itself is broken. More exactly its come down to this the big $$ interests own it. The rest of us have been excluded. Its no longer a Gov't by the people for the people. Its a Gov't by 1% of the people for 1% of the people.