Revolution
Old 10-07-2011, 01:11 PM   #1 (permalink)
hibernating

Retired Administrator
 
Benzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,290
Representing:
Default Revolution

I have decided to post some feelings in light of "occupy wall street". It really got me to thinking. As a preamble I really hope we can keep any debate that spurs out of this civil and not personal. I am not going to reference anything, or wiki "facts" to back up what I am saying because this is more just an emotional response to something I can't quite wrap my head around....

...Revolution

I understand that my views of the world, politics and money leave me on an island of sorts and thats ok, but as a look back on history and its great revolutions I can't help but think that those on the barricades in france or fighting for their freedom in southern US, would look at most the people standing on wall street with disgust.

Historically people fought for the right to vote and have a free opinion, they fought for the right to earn money and they fought for the right to eat in some cases the fought for the right to exist.

What are these people fighting? Capitalism? Money? Corporations? I am not going to take my opinion from sound bites from the news as I have come to the conclusion that all media is biased and you will never get the truth anyway.

They stand there in protest of a system, that while not perfect has provided the greatest opportunity of wealth to the most amount of people. Why do they care if a corporation makes billions of dollars and a bunch of shareholders are getting rich? Is it because they feel they should be rich too?
Is their problem not then with the government and while I disagree, why are they not protesting the white house? Instead, naively they sing the praises of Barrack Obama who took more money from "wall street" backers than any president in history.

I just wish I could get a clear answer on what great evils "Wall Street" has brought upon them? They have almost everything they could ask for including the ability to protest.

There was a time, and in some countries it would still happen where at the first sign of protest they would be shot. All great revolutions were fought with a clear understanding of what injustice needs to be reversed. I just don't understand what they are fighting against, or I should say that their anger is misdirected.

They have the right to protest, that revolution was fought long a go by both liberals and conservatives, rich and poor and I do not begrudge them exercising that right, I just hope it isn't being taken advantage of.

I just can't help but think that those that rose up against real injustice are not looking down and with a sigh and saying "what the fuck?"

Last edited by Benzo; 10-07-2011 at 01:13 PM.
Benzo is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2011, 01:24 PM   #2 (permalink)
I believe in Masai!

giant steps

 
'trane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 16,567
Representing:
Default

there is a huge global problem with concentration of wealth, and with the way that access to wealth is unavailable to massive swathes of the world's population. there are many that believe it is unjust to celebrate the individual freedom of rich people to get richer when there are hundreds of millions that are basically starving. this argument is very old, but also very real. and because of how that wealth is concentrated, it is difficult to make a clean and cogent criticism of it without looking like you are railing against something ethereal or spectre-like.

the fact that a system was established that brought prosperity is not a relevant argument as to whether it could (or should) be better, or whether there should be something esle instead. in many parts of the world, this question really is about the right to earn money, the right to eat and the right to have an opinion.

i think people that are taking part in this want a system with less emphasis on wealth generation and more on justice. they want a world (and a leadership) that is willing to stand up for a different set of priorities that focus on increasing standards of living and decreasing overall suffering rather than standing up for the rights of single individuals to get the most wealth possible.

the american system was set up on a basic principle of individual liberty. that sounds ideal, but the reality of it is that it creates intense competition from a playing field that was never level. this has led to an ever-concentrated centre of wealth, and a huge amount of 'injustice'. and the amazing thing about it is that people have been hoodwinked to think that any disagreement with that is a threat to freedom.
'trane is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2011, 01:33 PM   #3 (permalink)
hibernating

Retired Administrator
 
Benzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,290
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 'trane View Post
there is a huge global problem with concentration of wealth, and with the way that access to wealth is unavailable to massive swathes of the world's population. there are many that believe it is unjust to celebrate the individual freedom of rich people to get richer when there are hundreds of millions that are basically starving. this argument is very old, but also very real. and because of how that wealth is concentrated, it is difficult to make a clean and cogent criticism of it without looking like you are railing against something ethereal or spectre-like.

the fact that a system was established that brought prosperity is not a relevant argument as to whether it could (or should) be better, or whether there should be something esle instead. in many parts of the world, this question really is about the right to earn money, the right to eat and the right to have an opinion.

i think people that are taking part in this want a system with less emphasis on wealth generation and more on justice. they want a world (and a leadership) that is willing to stand up for a different set of priorities that focus on increasing standards of living and decreasing overall suffering rather than standing up for the rights of single individuals to get the most wealth possible.

the american system was set up on a basic principle of individual liberty. that sounds ideal, but the reality of it is that it creates intense competition from a playing field that was never level. this has led to an ever-concentrated centre of wealth, and a huge amount of 'injustice'. and the amazing thing about it is that people have been hoodwinked to think that any disagreement with that is a threat to freedom.
Ok, even if I accept all of that to be true, (and the only thing I take issue with is that in most countries the right to eat, or for women to drive or vote or people to get aid, has very little to do with "Capitalism" and more to do with dictators that self appoint themselves as governments) why are they protesting wall street? They hate stocks? Why are more people not enraged by genocide? I wish they would direct their protest to in the right direction.

The world has many problems and wall street isn't even in the top ten.
Benzo is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2011, 01:52 PM   #4 (permalink)
I believe in Masai!

giant steps

 
'trane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 16,567
Representing:
Default

wall street facilitates (and is a symbol of) that wealth concentration. it is not solely responsible for it, by any stretch of the imagination, but there is enormous power in it, and that power is out of the realm of possibility for the vast majority of humans.

the question of whether or not they hate stocks is kind of missing the point.

finance capital is an abstraction, and a fetishization of power and of the productive and earning capacity of people. and the connection of that wealth and that abstraction of power to media outlets and government is troubling to people who want access to equity and to a say in the way standards are set and the way values are expressed in terms of praxis.
'trane is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2011, 02:05 PM   #5 (permalink)
hibernating

Retired Administrator
 
Benzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,290
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 'trane View Post
wall street facilitates (and is a symbol of) that wealth concentration. it is not solely responsible for it, by any stretch of the imagination, but there is enormous power in it, and that power is out of the realm of possibility for the vast majority of humans.

the question of whether or not they hate stocks is kind of missing the point.

finance capital is an abstraction, and a fetishization of power and of the productive and earning capacity of people. and the connection of that wealth and that abstraction of power to media outlets and government is troubling to people who want access to equity and to a say in the way standards are set and the way values are expressed in terms of praxis.
Yet they protest in designer clothes, tweet from their iphones after they are done they go to the store and buy what they want, watch some tv and crawl into bed. We have access to more information than ever before in the history of the universe. We watch sports and play video games, we go to movies and are free to express ourselves as we please.

My question is, are things really so bad? Forget the overarching politik of unions vs corporations. Our poor in north america would be considered by 90% of the world to be some of the luckiest people on the planet.

Finance capital is a result of people with power and money making the rules so they continue to have power and money. I would just rather they have it than Idi Amin.

If those protesting the system truly hated the system they should not be enjoying the fruits of the system.

So while we talk about Raptors, Comic Books and You Tube Videos, we have the ability and the forum (pun intended) to rail against the "great injustice" while some in the world are not allowed to drive to speak or have an opinion. I would like to protest that, I would like to protest the hypocrisy.
Benzo is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2011, 02:43 PM   #6 (permalink)
I believe in Masai!

giant steps

 
'trane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 16,567
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benzo View Post
Yet they protest in designer clothes, tweet from their iphones after they are done they go to the store and buy what they want, watch some tv and crawl into bed. We have access to more information than ever before in the history of the universe. We watch sports and play video games, we go to movies and are free to express ourselves as we please.

My question is, are things really so bad? Forget the overarching politik of unions vs corporations. Our poor in north america would be considered by 90% of the world to be some of the luckiest people on the planet.

Finance capital is a result of people with power and money making the rules so they continue to have power and money. I would just rather they have it than Idi Amin.

If those protesting the system truly hated the system they should not be enjoying the fruits of the system.

So while we talk about Raptors, Comic Books and You Tube Videos, we have the ability and the forum (pun intended) to rail against the "great injustice" while some in the world are not allowed to drive to speak or have an opinion. I would like to protest that, I would like to protest the hypocrisy.
you are protesting the hypocrisy right now.

there are a number of logical issues with your argument. i will try to get at those first. some of them may bleed into things that are not simply logical criticisms because of how they are linked:

1. this is not a homogeneous group of people. while there may indeed be designer clothes-wearing, iphone-having hipsters amongst the group, they are not the only ones, and the overall set of motives is too disparate to be clumped together under the criticism you have described. this is either an ad hominem or a fallacy of composition. or both. it is also an appeal to ridicule.

2. all of those things about access to information and sports, movies and video games, etc do not mean that the system is working properly, that people should not take issue with it and express that as protest, or that anyone has any more access to power and control over their lives than they used to. it is a non-sequitur.

3. you say you would rather the rich and powerful have access to the rules to obtain more riches and powers than idi amin. idi amin, or any other dictator, is not the only alternative. that's a red herring and also a false dilemma. i would say that i would rather than the power lie in altogether different sorts of hands. this would be another huge conversation. it suffices to say that you only presented two of many of possibilities and set them as the only choices. this is simply not the case.


now for some things that are less about the logic of your argument and more about the ideas in general:

-you mention about 'us' being the luckiest on the planet (i am paraphrasing as a point of reference, i know this isn't exactly your point). this protest is not simply directed at north america, nor is it simply representative of north american voices. i would guess that most of the ire against wall street is not about how americans are poor, it is about global poverty, about environment, about access and equity - it is a global issue manifesting itself against an american institution that holds power and influence on a global scale.

for many people in the world, and for many people in north america, things really are so bad. we're talking about poverty, about institutionalized poverty, about marginalization, about access to oppportunity. we may have a dream that anyone can make it big, but that is simply not true. many of the protesters would argue that this is a critical problem for the well-being of nations and of individuals, and many more would argue that this is a major destabalizer of peace. if someone has a strong belief in that and a good argument to back it up, they probably should be protesting. the fetishization inherent in finance capital is both a contributing cause and a symbol of power disparity.

-the fact that you dislike a system does not mean that you should not enjoy the fruits of it. in fact, it is nearly impossible not to be a part of the system in some way. this does not mean that you can't critique it and can't hope that it changes. but it would be senseless to not make any money, not invest anything, not buy food from stores or clothes in the winter just so that you can be pure when you protest. the 'system' is so vast and deep rooted that you have no choice but to participate on some level. i would be astonished if you truly felt that by buying food and clothes and a place to live you give up your right to protest without being labeled a hypocrite. (as a logical flaw this could be described as poisoning the well, although that could be debated).

the position you are supporting is entrenched on a daily basis. you are welcome to protest the hypocrisy, but i don't know that it is needed. it is especially unwarranted when directed at a heterogeneous group as if they are all the same and all have the same flaws.
'trane is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2011, 02:57 PM   #7 (permalink)
hibernating

Retired Administrator
 
Benzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,290
Representing:
Default

you are protesting the hypocrisy right now.

there are a number of logical issues with your argument. i will try to get at those first. some of them may bleed into things that are not simply logical criticisms because of how they are linked:

1.
Quote:
this is not a homogeneous group of people. while there may indeed be designer clothes-wearing, iphone-having hipsters amongst the group, they are not the only ones, and the overall set of motives is too disparate to be clumped together under the criticism you have described. this is either an ad hominem or a fallacy of composition. or both. it is also an appeal to ridicule.
So you would agree that there are a shit load of people that probably dont have any fucking clue what they are protesting? The criticism is fair of those that fit that description. It would be inaccurate to call it a fallacy as it is true of many of the individuals.


Quote:
2. all of those things about access to information and sports, movies and video games, etc do not mean that the system is working properly, that people should not take issue with it and express that as protest, or that anyone has any more access to power and control over their lives than they used to. it is a non-sequitur.
Ok I agree I guess. Will there ever be a perfect system though? I have power and control over my life, I have earned the ability to have it

Quote:
3. you say you would rather the rich and powerful have access to the rules to obtain more riches and powers than idi amin. idi amin, or any other dictator, is not the only alternative. that's a red herring and also a false dilemma. i would say that i would rather than the power lie in altogether different sorts of hands. this would be another huge conversation. it suffices to say that you only presented two of many of possibilities and set them as the only choices. this is simply not the case.
Someone will always be in a position of power, it is just the nature of things. You said you would rather have the power sit in different sorts of hands. It is still power, the only logical argument you can have is that no-one can have the power which is impossible. IBID

Quote:
now for some things that are less about the logic of your argument and more about the ideas in general:

-you mention about 'us' being the luckiest on the planet (i am paraphrasing as a point of reference, i know this isn't exactly your point). this protest is not simply directed at north america, nor is it simply representative of north american voices. i would guess that most of the ire against wall street is not about how americans are poor, it is about global poverty, about environment, about access and equity - it is a global issue manifesting itself against an american institution that holds power and influence on a global scale.
I can agree, but as stated before most global poverty is not rooted at all in corporate greed but that of the individual. You have never really addressed it but there are greater evils in the world. It is a global issue sure but not THE global issue.

f
Quote:
or many people in the world, and for many people in north america, things really are so bad. we're talking about poverty, about institutionalized poverty, about marginalization, about access to oppportunity. we may have a dream that anyone can make it big, but that is simply not true. many of the protesters would argue that this is a critical problem for the well-being of nations and of individuals, and many more would argue that this is a major destabalizer of peace. if someone has a strong belief in that and a good argument to back it up, they probably should be protesting. the fetishization inherent in finance capital is both a contributing cause and a symbol of power disparity.
Again, we just disagree, Capitalism has provided more opportunity than any other system ever.

Quote:
-the fact that you dislike a system does not mean that you should not enjoy the fruits of it. in fact, it is nearly impossible not to be a part of the system in some way. this does not mean that you can't critique it and can't hope that it changes. but it would be senseless to not make any money, not invest anything, not buy food from stores or clothes in the winter just so that you can be pure when you protest. the 'system' is so vast and deep rooted that you have no choice but to participate on some level. i would be astonished if you truly felt that by buying food and clothes and a place to live you give up your right to protest without being labeled a hypocrite. (as a logical flaw this could be described as poisoning the well, although that could be debated).
There is a difference between need and want, and it what separates these hypocrites from the greats like Ghandi. Food, Clothes and roofs I have no problem with and never mentioned it. Some of them are participating in the same excess the are protesting.

Quote:
the position you are supporting is entrenched on a daily basis. you are welcome to protest the hypocrisy, but i don't know that it is needed. it is especially unwarranted when directed at a heterogeneous group as if they are all the same and all have the same flaws.
and I dont know that their protest is needed.
Benzo is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2011, 03:24 PM   #8 (permalink)
I believe in Masai!

giant steps

 
'trane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 16,567
Representing:
Default

i am running out of time this afternoon, but here are a collection of some of my rebuttals against your last post.

-i don't know how many are a shit load, nor how many in the group fit that bill. your orginal argument did not make a distinction. this is misleading and problematic in terms of making your point.

-that you have power and control over your life is by no means an indication that other people do, that they are not frustrated with the disparity between theirs and your access, and that they should not give voice to that frustration and hope that the disparity is closed over time.

-the idea that no one can have the power is not the only alternative to either rich and powerful people or dictators having power. this is another logical fallacy. the idea that power can be shared, that decisions can be made collectively and that both pwer and wealth can be effectively redistributed has many iterations. there is simply nothing to the point that you are making here, and the presupposition of my position is completely false.

-that this is not THE global issue is not a reason to avoid talking about it and protesting it. there could be a huge debate about teh nexus of individual greed and corporate greed, and many of the criticisms may be that it is not an issue of greed, per se, but instead an issue of systemic and institutional problems that are not rooted in any individual.

-that capitalism provided more opportunity than any otehr system is not a legitimizing force behind it. there is still room for improvement. there are also very different aspects to capitalism. the wall street aspect is more about finance capital - things like derivative cocktails and highly volatile speculation that have huge implications for the overall system. reducing it to 'capitalism creates opportunity' and then sayting capitalism should be free from that kind of criticism is reducing the argument to an absurdly simplistic place, both in terms of what we mean by capitalism and what is being protested against.

-gandhi was not a great. you should probably read more about him before you go making claims like that. he did many good things, but had serious flaws, one of which was very strong racism towards blacks. but that is another argument altogether.

Last edited by 'trane; 10-07-2011 at 03:33 PM.
'trane is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2011, 03:33 PM   #9 (permalink)
hibernating

Retired Administrator
 
Benzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,290
Representing:
Default

All you have done is set up rules that make any argument I am making invalid by your doctrine.

"Shared Power" sounds an awful lot like the democracy we have today.



My point about Ghandi was that he was a great protestor and had strength of his convictions regardless of how he felt about blacks.
Benzo is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2011, 03:36 PM   #10 (permalink)
I believe in Masai!

giant steps

 
'trane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 16,567
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benzo View Post
All you have done is set up rules that make any argument I am making invalid by your doctrine.
please explain. what rules did i set up? i'm not sure if you are referring to the loigical fallacies. certainliy i did not make those up. i'm not sure what other rules i could have stated.

and i don't really have an expressed doctrine in this debate. your original post seemed to ask for some clarification as to what people are protesting. i am trying to give a clear voice to that and to counter some of the points that you are making against it. i am not part of this movement, and although i have some sympathy for some of it, i don't accept it all as fact either. but i also don't reject it outright for reasons that are quite simply leaps in logic.



are you suggesting that these protesters don't have strength in their convictions, or just the few that have jobs and ipads? also, is it enough to have strength in your conviction if your conviction is unjust?
'trane is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2011, 03:43 PM   #11 (permalink)
hibernating

Retired Administrator
 
Benzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,290
Representing:
Default

Quote:
please explain. what rules did i set up? i'm not sure if you are referring to the loigical fallacies. certainliy i did not make those up. i'm not sure what other rules i could have stated.
Because you say something is a fallacy does not make it one. Because you call one a red herring doesn't make it so.

Quote:
and i don't really have an expressed doctrine in this debate. your original post seemed to ask for some clarification as to what people are protesting. i am trying to give a clear voice to that and to counter some of the points that you are making against it. i am not part of this movement, and although i have some sympathy for some of it, i don't accept it all as fact either. but i also don't reject it outright for reasons that are quite simply leaps in logic.
I asked for clarification yes, instead I got preached to.



Quote:
are you suggesting that these protesters don't have strength in their convictions, or just the few that have jobs and ipads?
I am saying that a very small group do yes.

Quote:
also, is it enough to have strength in your conviction if your conviction is unjust?
Enough? no. the better question is, "can you have strength in your conviction and have it be unjust"? the answer to that is yes.
Benzo is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2011, 03:47 PM   #12 (permalink)
I believe in Masai!

giant steps

 
'trane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 16,567
Representing:
Default

logical fallacies are not my invention. if you have a counter to why i say that it is one, please go for it. i think you will likely find that i am right. or you can ask a guy like bill h or ligeia. they have a fairly strong understanding of logical argument and fairness, and would likely to be happy to point out where i am wrong. and i will be quite happy to concede if i have made an incorrect judgement of a fallacy. that's how the process of rational argumentation works.

you didn't get preached to, you got my response when you gave a pretty inaccurate criticism of the issue at hand. now you are making it personal, which you asked that it not become. i am giving what i think are truthful responses to your statements.

what i take from all of this is that you have an objection to a small group of the protesters that seem to be posers. i agree with that if that is all that you are saying.
'trane is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2011, 03:54 PM   #13 (permalink)
hibernating

Retired Administrator
 
Benzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,290
Representing:
Default

Quote:
you didn't get preached to, you got my response when you gave a pretty inaccurate criticism of the issue at hand.
I gave an inaccurate criticism? Read my first post again. Point out to me where my inaccurate criticism took place?

Quote:
now you are making it personal, which you asked that it not become. i am giving what i think are truthful responses to your statements.
Not personal at all, your posts are preachy I wouldn't call that personal. If I had said you are full of condescension and pretension that would have been personal.


Quote:
what i take from all of this is that you have an objection to a small group of teh protesters that seem to be posers. i agree with that if that is all that you are saying.
You say small I say most.
Benzo is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2011, 03:59 PM   #14 (permalink)
I believe in Masai!

giant steps

 
'trane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 16,567
Representing:
Default

i pointed out the inaccuracies in your op in my first response. i have argued that you made several others as this discussion went on. it should be fairly evident by now which parts i think were inaccurate.

i'm not sure how my answers are preachy, but even if they are this isn't much of a criticism. i could point out the logical fallacy here too, but i don't think that is going to get us anywhere.

i don't think you have any way to claim 'most'. this is an unprovable assumption, and i would argue is therefore irrelevant. it is a guess, and hardly advances your position.



anybody who reads this and has real knowledge of what constitutes these logical fallacies is welcome to point out which of them i am incorrect in attributing to benzo's points.
'trane is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2011, 04:06 PM   #15 (permalink)
hibernating

Retired Administrator
 
Benzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,290
Representing:
Default

Quote:
i don't think you have any way to claim 'most'. this is an unprovable assumption, and i would argue is therefore irrelevant. it is a guess, and hardly advances your position.
See this is what I'm talking about..you made the claim that it is a "small group" this is an unprovable assumption, and I would argue is therefore irrelevant. I suppose that the rules don't apply to you though, only when I do it.
Benzo is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2011, 04:07 PM   #16 (permalink)
LX
present minded

In the Paint


 
LX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 27,763
Representing:
Default

I think there is some minimalizing of wall street's destructive and corrosive effects here. There are a shitload, and I mean a shitload, of people that got a good education so they could take their place in the system only to find that the jobs aren't there, of people that had retirement savings wiped out, of people that can't any longer save for the future, and while a good deal of that may lie upon their own shoulders, there is an undeniable amount of damage that was done to the economy by a real conspiratorial rigging of the system and the need to prop that same system up once again with very little changes. Raise taxes on millionaires in order to be able to invest in education and new technologies? Fuck that. These guys are completely entrenched politically. They have literally bought power. So where does anyone go to try to stop the abuses? It sure the fuck isn't DC.

This isn't all that different from what went on in the Arab world. A good deal of that was about basic staples starting to become out of reach while people became more aware of how basic rights could not be counted on. It's becoming quite clear that the idea of wealth is becoming meaningless, particularly to large swathes of people that supported the idea in order to lead a simple but good life. When you take away the promise of a stable future, a shitload of people see tyranny. A good deal of them likely have comforts undreamed of centuries ago, but tyranny is still tyranny. Wall Street threatens the ideals of the past revolutionaries, and I would suspect that their bile would be directed at those tyrannical schemers. I'm thinking they did not fight and die to have people happy to be playing video games and watching football on tv while democratic foundations are continuously eroded, habeus corpus is taken out of the justice system, and inequality becomes an obvious shame.

Seeing these people looking to each other in facing a future where growing economies simply will not be possible, gives me a sense of hope. Asserting the importance of wealth at this point seems catastrophic. New ways are in the offing, just as capitalism was at one time. This is just a movement in it's earliest infancy. Get used to it. The alternative would seem to be power for the sake of power in an ever narrowing process, or big squeeze.
LX is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2011, 04:13 PM   #17 (permalink)
hibernating

Retired Administrator
 
Benzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,290
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LX View Post
I think there is some minimalizing of wall street's destructive and corrosive effects here. There are a shitload, and I mean a shitload, of people that got a good education so they could take their place in the system only to find that the jobs aren't there, of people that had retirement savings wiped out, of people that can't any longer save for the future, and while a good deal of that may lie upon their own shoulders, there is an undeniable amount of damage that was done to the economy by a real conspiratorial rigging of the system and the need to prop that same system up once again with very little changes. Raise taxes on millionaires in order to be able to invest in education and new technologies? Fuck that. These guys are completely entrenched politically. They have literally bought power. So where does anyone go to try to stop the abuses? It sure the fuck isn't DC.

This isn't all that different from what went on in the Arab world. A good deal of that was about basic staples starting to become out of reach while people became more aware of how basic rights could not be counted on. It's becoming quite clear that the idea of wealth is becoming meaningless, particularly to large swathes of people that supported the idea in order to lead a simple but good life. When you take away the promise of a stable future, a shitload of people see tyranny. A good deal of them likely have comforts undreamed of centuries ago, but tyranny is still tyranny. Wall Street threatens the ideals of the past revolutionaries, and I would suspect that their bile would be directed at those tyrannical schemers. I'm thinking they did not fight and die to have people happy to be playing video games and watching football on tv while democratic foundations are continuously eroded, habeus corpus is taken out of the justice system, and inequality becomes an obvious shame.

Seeing these people looking to each other in facing a future where growing economies simply will not be possible, gives me a sense of hope. Asserting the importance of wealth at this point seems catastrophic. New ways are in the offing, just as capitalism was at one time. This is just a movement in it's earliest infancy. Get used to it. The alternative would seem to be power for the sake of power in an ever narrowing process, or big squeeze.
At least it wasn't pretentious, I will say that.

Are you willing to give up your comforts?
Benzo is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2011, 04:22 PM   #18 (permalink)
I believe in Masai!

giant steps

 
'trane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 16,567
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benzo View Post
See this is what I'm talking about..you made the claim that it is a "small group" this is an unprovable assumption, and I would argue is therefore irrelevant. I suppose that the rules don't apply to you though, only when I do it.
that was a good criticism. it was a logical fallacy on my part (special pleading).

that said, i don't think i am claiming that it is either 'small' or 'most', nor am i trying to make a provable point. i am simply stating that i don't agree with your point because it is unprovable, but i could concede that i tend to agree if you are only talking about a few. this is a generalization in the hope of finding common ground. i never meant to imply that there was a definitive answer to either small or most.

i should have worded it better.
'trane is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2011, 04:27 PM   #19 (permalink)
LX
present minded

In the Paint


 
LX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 27,763
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benzo View Post
At least it wasn't pretentious, I will say that.

Are you willing to give up your comforts?
Absolutely, under a new system that allows for fairness and values that mean something. And if you're just being sarcastic and facetious, then fuck this whole discussion.
LX is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2011, 05:16 PM   #20 (permalink)
landry fields forever

Administrator

 
Acie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Living in a van down by the river
Posts: 21,599
Representing:
Default

Acie is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:49 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright RaptorsForum.com 2005-2011

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24