"The political and economic elites are the one percent who control the world and we are the one percent seeking to change it. Where are the (other) 98 percent?" said Chico Whitaker, one of the Forum's founders.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id ... _article=1

In order to evaluate their proposal, I would need to ask one question: Change to what?

But World Social Forum participants, including representatives of the Arab Spring, Spain's "Indignant" movement, Occupy Wall Street, and students from Chile, sharply criticized the concept of "a green economy" that would allow multinational corporations to reap the profit.

Didn't OWS supporters tell us that OWS wasn't "anticapitalist?"

"If the system is not capable of redistributing and deal with inequality, we have to do it ourselves," agreed Sam Halvorsen, of the Occupy London movemen

What is "it" in that sentence?

horacerumpole wrote:Didn't OWS supporters tell us that OWS wasn't "anticapitalist?"

some maybe, not all. As far as I know OWS is inherently anticapitalist. If it wasn't than what's the point?

sandinista wrote:

horacerumpole wrote:Didn't OWS supporters tell us that OWS wasn't "anticapitalist?"

some maybe, not all. As far as I know OWS is inherently anticapitalist. If it wasn't than what's the point?

I have held that view all along. However, every pro-OWSer I run across seems to take great offense to the merest suggestion that they are not pro-capitalism.

Carl Marx tried to change away from capitalism, and he gained a lot of followers who implmented his ideas. Result was a humanitarian catastrophe.

I get kind of annoyed at protestors who oppose something without having a solid proposal as a substitute. If you want to oppose capitalism, you had better have done your homework, because every alternative tried so far has been a disaster.

Lance wrote:Carl Marx tried to change away from capitalism, and he gained a lot of followers who implmented his ideas. Result was a humanitarian catastrophe.

I get kind of annoyed at protestors who oppose something without having a solid proposal as a substitute. If you want to oppose capitalism, you had better have done your homework, because every alternative tried so far has been a disaster.

Who's Carl Marx?

The evil twin of Karl.

Who is it that's not done their homework again?

horacerumpole wrote:

sandinista wrote:

horacerumpole wrote:Didn't OWS supporters tell us that OWS wasn't "anticapitalist?"

some maybe, not all. As far as I know OWS is inherently anticapitalist. If it wasn't than what's the point?

I have held that view all along. However, every pro-OWSer I run across seems to take great offense to the merest suggestion that they are not pro-capitalism.

It's not inherently pro-capitalism or anti-capitalism. It's anti-cowboy capitalism (i.e. unregulated capitalism that screwed the middle class). Obviously any anti-capitalism people will be anti-cowboy capitalism as well, but not everyone who is against cowboy capitalism will be againt capitalism in its entirety.

Why cant they protest in favour of responsible, fair capitalism. I would be at the forefront. Shrugging with the best of them.

horacerumpole wrote:

"If the system is not capable of redistributing and deal with inequality, we have to do it ourselves," agreed Sam Halvorsen, of the Occupy London movemen

What is "it" in that sentence?

I thought you knew your grammar. "It" is "redistributing and deal with inequality." Seems rather plain enough, eh?

james1v wrote:Why cant they protest in favour of responsible, fair capitalism. I would be at the forefront. Shrugging with the best of them.

In effect, this is what they're doing, wouldn't you say?

"protest in favor" is a prelude to an oxymoron.

But all protests take an opposite stand on whatever issue they're protesting. If anyone protests against cowboy capitalism, then it's seems only logical that they favor "responsible, fair capitalism" and their protest should be interpreted in that way, or certainly could be so interpreted at any rate.

FACT-MAN-2 wrote:

james1v wrote:Why cant they protest in favour of responsible, fair capitalism. I would be at the forefront. Shrugging with the best of them.

In effect, this is what they're doing, wouldn't you say?

"protest in favor" is a prelude to an oxymoron.

But all protests take an opposite stand on whatever issue they're protesting. If anyone protests against cowboy capitalism, then it's seems only logical that they favor "responsible, fair capitalism" and their protest should be interpreted in that way, or certainly could be so interpreted at any rate.

Then consider me the leader of the shruggers. I protest.

Saim wrote:

horacerumpole wrote:

sandinista wrote:

horacerumpole wrote:Didn't OWS supporters tell us that OWS wasn't "anticapitalist?"

some maybe, not all. As far as I know OWS is inherently anticapitalist. If it wasn't than what's the point?

I have held that view all along. However, every pro-OWSer I run across seems to take great offense to the merest suggestion that they are not pro-capitalism.

It's not inherently pro-capitalism or anti-capitalism. It's anti-cowboy capitalism (i.e. unregulated capitalism that screwed the middle class). Obviously any anti-capitalism people will be anti-cowboy capitalism as well, but not everyone who is against cowboy capitalism will be againt capitalism in its entirety.

And "Cowboy capitalism" has to include the inordinate control the banks wield over the Senate, which is a stranglehold if there ever was one.

See an article on this at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/3 ... 40762.html

It'll knock your socks off.

I think it's intensely difficult to make accurate assessments of what any given movement is "for" or "against" except in the broadest or most obvious terms. The consistent message with #OWS has been protesting the upward redistribution of wealth to the 1%, and the fact that "Wall Street" entities and people that were in part responsible for the financial crisis suffered no repercussions.

MoonLit wrote:

sandinista wrote:

horacerumpole wrote:Didn't OWS supporters tell us that OWS wasn't "anticapitalist?"

some maybe, not all. As far as I know OWS is inherently anticapitalist. If it wasn't than what's the point?

Er, I didn't get that from OWS at all. More like they're "anti unfair bullshit economics".

Lance wrote:Carl Marx tried to change away from capitalism, and he gained a lot of followers who implmented his ideas. Result was a humanitarian catastrophe.

I get kind of annoyed at protestors who oppose something without having a solid proposal as a substitute. If you want to oppose capitalism, you had better have done your homework, because every alternative tried so far has been a disaster.

And what about the countries that have a fine mixture of socialism and capitalism?

You mean like the US, which operates some of the biggest socialist programs in the history of economics, namely, social security, Medicare, and Medicaid, with several additional socialistic programs thrown in for good measure, CHIP, Food Stamps, GI BIll, veterans benefits, Pell Grants and others, plus a gold plated medical insurance program for Members of Congress and employees of the government, not to mention huge subsidies to agriculture and energy.

How soon we forget, eh? Or how soon we choose to deny, whichever, but these programs stand in stark contrast to the characterization that the US is "all capitalist all the time."

Lance can't even get Mr. Marx's first name right, how the hell could we expect him to get anything else right about the man?

Unless Americans want their country to look like Mexico or Indonesia or Haiti, at least any more than it already does, they'd better be prepared to defend what socialism they enjoy and fight to the death to keep it, because when it's gone the only safety net will be a slow diseased death in some gutter somewhere.

Lance wrote:Carl Marx tried to change away from capitalism, and he gained a lot of followers who implmented his ideas. Result was a humanitarian catastrophe.

I get kind of annoyed at protestors who oppose something without having a solid proposal as a substitute. If you want to oppose capitalism, you had better have done your homework, because every alternative tried so far has been a disaster.

You might want to actually have a grasp of Karl Marx before you credit him with the failures of 20th century Communism, which were inspired by the theories of Lenin, who himself had ideas similar to Blanqui...a man who Karl Marx and Engels condemned. Marx criticized such individuals who engaged in "revolutionary phase-mongering." You may be surprised to hear that Marx believed parliamentary democracy in Britain could achieve socialism, he was not opposed to reformism.

Your argument is similar to those who have absolutely no grasp of Charle's Darwin's theories and credit him with Nazi Germany because Hitler was inspired by the idea of social darwinism, something Darwin never espoused.

You couldn't even spell the man's name correctly. You know that Welfare State we have? That mixed economy, called social democracy, that we have? Might as well credit Karl Marx for inspiring Marxist movements and parties that later evolved into democratic socialist and reformist parties, into the Labour parties that set up the modern Welfare State and helped the average person receive a lot more rights...like...we don't have to work 16 hours a day anymore.

"there are few thinkers in modern history whose thought has been so badly misrepresented, by Marxists and anti-Marxists alike" (Hal Draper)

FACT-MAN-2 wrote:Lance can't even get Mr. Marx's first name right, how the hell could we expect him to get anything else right about the man?

Because typos and poor spelling are indicative of deeper problems, clearly! Should I gesture to the quality of your spelling as a reflection of the quality of your ideas?

Loren Michael wrote:

FACT-MAN-2 wrote:Lance can't even get Mr. Marx's first name right, how the hell could we expect him to get anything else right about the man?

Because typos and poor spelling are indicative of deeper problems, clearly! Should I gesture to the quality of your spelling as a reflection of the quality of your ideas?

Hmm, "c" is far away from "k" on the keyboard. Both "c" and "k" sound similar. For example, "cat" and "kitten," or in this case, "Carl" and "Karl." He really had no idea how the name was spelled.