Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Think you need to know something, guys...labeling in media

Posted 12 years ago on Sept. 29, 2011, 1:56 p.m. EST by Novanglus (58)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Reuters just labeled this protest as "anti-capitalist." Personally, I don't think this is necessarily true. I don't think we have anything per se about somebody earning a profit off of his hard work, being rewarded for talent and hard work, but we more accurately resent it when it comes at the expense of millions and their ability to live. We ask for rights that were once taken for granted in this country; 100 years ago men and women grew tired of robber barons making so much money off of their labor with so little regard for the little people who make their wealth possible. We ask to be treated decently and humanely by a system that has become inherently inhumane and corrupt.

Anyone willing to tweet that to Reuters and the other media goons?

14 Comments

14 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by revg33k (429) from Woodstock, IL 12 years ago

I said it before and I will say it again, if you do not five the media a common goal of the movement (aka nothing to report) the will make things up to report.

The movement needs to work on adopting goals this is a good place to start

https://occupywallst.org/forum/proposed-list-of-demands-please-help-editadd-so-th/

[-] 1 points by Chromer (124) 12 years ago

I knew this was going to happen. I'm not trying to preach, but when I first started tracking this movement I noticed a lot of signs bearing anti-capitalist slogans. I know there are a lot of people out there with many differing opinions, but for this movement to work I feel you need the support of the American people. That support will not be forthcoming if they feel this is an anti-capitalist, socialist movement. I'm not saying it is, but I really think the organizers need to seriously look at this issue.

[-] 1 points by wheelwright (3) 12 years ago

Corruption is the problem. Whether the government runs everything as in the Soviet Union, or individuals are allowed to start businesses and save up capital, there can be corruption. The Founders were seriously concerned about the potential for corporate corruption, which we now struggle with.

[-] 1 points by ZinnReader (92) from Encinitas, CA 12 years ago

Many here many agree that unfettered capitalism has hurt many people, but that does not necessarily mean they have socialist views.

RESIST LABELS. The beauty of this movement is that is represents people from all walks of life -- all races, genders, classes, ethnicities, and sexual orientation. It's about creating an open and free society that respects the voice of the people. In this sense it is about Democracy in action.

Refraining from labels like "Anti-Capitalist" will ensure that this movement remains open to infinite possibilities.

[-] 1 points by 0815 (58) 12 years ago

I have one bone to pick with the left. Only one: Qis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Therfore I am for voluntary socialism. Keep legislation out of it! (basically I agree)

[-] 1 points by Novanglus (58) 12 years ago

What you say is perfectly fair. But I will say that we are the ones that watch the watchers-that is the way it was originally intended. (It is funny how teachers used to hyperfocus on Thomas Jefferson being a hypocritical slave master when I was in school, but when I tried to question them on some of the basic things he said about citizens being the ultimate guardians of their democracy they looked at me like I was from Mars or just let their eyes bulge out again, "And he only believed that because he had SLLLAAAVVVEES!") Jefferson may have owned slaves, and he was indeed wrong to do so, but he was right about "knowing of no safe repository of the ultimate power of society but the people."

On the other hand, I am growing rather weary of the bible thumpers who say that people who are poor and sick don't deserve proper healthcare and they should buy it like everyone else (even if they cannot afford it) and thus give inordinate power to a select group of insurance companies. I am impatient with people who refuse to tax the 1% and have asked the middle classes to pay an ever increasing share over the past thirty years to the point where if one of their numbers gets sick with cancer, they shall go bankrupt. I can't take it when I see one of those guys in an Armani suit shout about values and go to gospel brunches in Alabama when the simplest words of Christ are these-

Whatsoever you do to the least of my people, that you do unto me. (Matthew 25:40)

Normally I don't like to bring religion into this mess, but it is galling when they profess one thing and do quite another. I am even half reminded of when I was a small child and hearing about what Cain said snottily to God when God couldn't find Abel-"Am I my brother's keeper?" I also remember that God did not take being sassed well, and wonder if these men are men of God only when it suits their purposes.....much like the type Jefferson warned about.

[-] 1 points by entrepreneur99 (114) from Los Angeles, CA 12 years ago

I am not anti-capitalist. There is debate about this going on in this thread: https://occupywallst.org/forum/is-this-movement-being-co-opted-by-the-left/

[-] 1 points by pariscommune (205) 12 years ago

inherently inhumane doesnt go well with treating decently. you need to decide if the system is inhumane or corrupted, the matter of being anti-capitalist or capitalist. if you think you can have this system without modern robber barons then show me just a grain of evidence from wherever in the world where capitalism strives without the 1%, the always increasing disparaty between rich and poor. you dont want to believe that this is the truth of this system.

[-] 1 points by Novanglus (58) 12 years ago

That is the point-one cannot be treated humanely by a system that has become inherently inhumane and corrupt. The system as it stands has become that way over the past 35 years in particular with the gradual erosion of laws that were put in place during the Great Depression and the Populist era.

The United States actually had a pretty good system in place during the 1960s that, while capitalist, did not have the level of income inequality that is present today nor did it have tax codes that beggared the middle class or the poor while the rich paid nearly nothing; the term outsourcing didn't even exist yet. Though I don't expect we shall ever go back there again, I don't think that totally abandoning capitalism is the answer either-perhaps a hybrid between socialism and capitalism is a good model in the long run.

[-] 1 points by pariscommune (205) 12 years ago

well the income inequality rising in every capitalist system doesnt make the 1960s any better. you didnt have the productive power to generate such an income inequality as today, thats the facts. workers were on minimal wage just the same, war was waged just the same, there was no medicare but building atomic bombs against the sovjet union... whats a hybrid between socialism and capitalism? is it what you have today, capitalism with social services? or whats your idea about that?

[-] 1 points by 0815 (58) 12 years ago

Erin Kurtz Head of Public Relations, Media & Editorial Head of Americas Public Relations Tel: +1 646.223.8149 mailto:erin.kurtz@thomsonreuters.com

Headquarters: Thomson Reuters 3 Times Square New York, NY 10036 USA Tel: +1 646.223.4000

[-] 1 points by Novanglus (58) 12 years ago

yes, yes, but do you AGREE with this?

[-] 1 points by gawdoftruth (3698) from Santa Barbara, CA 12 years ago

we are anti corporate oligarchy. anti oligarchy. capitalism is an interesting idea but its a system that has never actually been implemented. If anything, capitalists who are sincere should be on our side in overthrowing the corporate oligarchy, we can work out whether to go with a capitalist system or a democratic one AFTER we get rid of our mutual systemic enemy. The truth is that they have a slave market system and a caste warfare economy, we want a free market system and we aren't using the term "free" in an orwellian sense to hide the truth of the exact opposite. Democracy by definition means a free market system and egalitarian social services to balance the powers of that free market system. So we need to work on our self definition and continually point out that any claim the system has to being capitalist or democratic is a transparent lie and con scam.

[-] 2 points by Novanglus (58) 12 years ago

I think we will start with the basics for now. What do we want?-The banksters to get their just desserts, the greed to stop, and for the first time in years to get the powers that be, in business and otherwise, to understand a simple truth:

vox populi, vox dei.