|
Last weekend there was a nice anticapitalistic demonstration in the capitol (Copenhagen). Actually there were 2 demonstrations that melted together - "anticapitalistic demonstration" and "get rid of the right wing government - we want our Denmark back demonstration".
So i thought it would be a really nice thing, to go there and be a part of the anticapitalistic demonstration haha. The demonstration began 1300 - travel with train 4 hours. Then have 3 hours in the capitol for myself where i would walk around and like see the city on my own.
All in all, that meant i had to leave my house at 500 to catch the train at 600. ROFL so my alarm went off at 4:00 but i just turned around and continued sleeping. Then by some miracle i woke up again 5:24. I immediately checked the time wtf. "Its over" i thought. Now i cant go there and it would be so nice. Then i thought maybe i can run and make it to the trainstation because it was so early that the busses didnt run yet and i dont have a bike. But then i thought its so hard to run that i didnt want to do it. But then i thought, hey i already payed for the tickets, both out and home. So i said to myself, Noway, im not gonna waste my money away like that! so off i went to the trainstation running 530 in the morning rofl. But as they say, a regime-change doesnt come by itself haha.
I came to the trainstation and the train was there. I just made it to my seats and then the train took off. Man i was so sweaty, but luckely i had brought 3 t-shirts, so it wasnt a problem, but i had to wait like 1 hour before i could wash myself and change because sweat was still pouring out of my body haha.
So i came to Copenhagen, a city i can easily get lost in. I had just looked on a map for a few minutes on the internet at home, and i have no cellphone or things like that, that can connect wireless to the internet. So i just had to use my instincts. it was easy to find the rendezvous point for the demonstration but there was nothing here yet, and i still had a lot of time left. A secondary objective i had with this trip was also to learn Copenhagen better. This means that i could go anywhere i want and i would be solving my secondary objective. So out into the nothingness i went!
So i was gonna cross a bridge and in Copenhagen there a a couple of bridges and i was crossing a bridge and i thought it was the right one but after, when i came home, i discovered i was on the wrong bridge. Despite being on the wrong street i was still able to find the rendezvous point, but i failed to locate my next target. So i went back and came to the demonstration. Now i had run for 30 min, walked for 3 hours - lol and only now began the real demonstration, where we had to walk to the city hall and have a big party there.
There is one thing i should mention too, the weather. This was by far the best day since winter took refuge to the north. Weatherforecast predicted 20 degree locally and no cloudcover at all.
This contributed to the atmosphere/experience in a very positive way. I was very happy that i brought myself here and the people was really nice too and very friendly.
Yo! i brought my camera to document - haha i made this 1 min recording:
http://www.mediafire.com/
My recording is after the melting of the 2 demonstrations.
Here is a more pro picture:
http://www.modkraft.dk/IMG/jpg/afskaf_vko05.jpg
It was estimated that the 2 demonstrations gathered around 2k people.
During the demonstration there were all sorts of flags, like anarchistic
![[image loading]](http://www.nostate.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/Anarchist-black-flag.png)
and Libertarian Socialist
![[image loading]](http://www.onthisdeity.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/anarchist-flag.png)
Which you also could call the anarco syndicalist flag.
and pure red flags. There were also people who just wanted to substitute the government and was not carrying any flags.
The peace flag was also seen:
The demonstration reached the city hall (but remained to stay outside), and here there were like a scene where people came to speak and when no one spoke then they played music. Basically it turned into one big open party with 2k people and then like 2-3 hours into the party some communists showed up. Dunno why they were not there during the demonstration but suddenly i saw their flags:
![[image loading]](http://apush-wiki-marlborough-school.wikispaces.com/file/view/Communism.jpg/75796191/Communism.jpg)
The party went on till i had to get to my train (well for me at least), and head back. That day was a really nice day but it was also a hard day for my legs. Im happy i went off instead of laying in my bed and miss everything.
I think my message to you is that you also can do this. Just get some experience with demonstrating. Just get out, even if you are happy with your government, then demonstrate that you are happy with your government.
I think my message to you is that demonstrating can be fun, even if you come alone, because in a demonstration you are never alone 
 
|
Can you explain the ideas, demands, and hopes for the demonstrations?
|
anticapitalistic demonstration i guess wants to get rid of the capitalist system
and
get rid of the right wing government - we want our Denmark back demonstration
wants to substitute the right wing government with a left wing government.
I may add that anticapitalistic demonstration wants a bigger change than get rid of the right wing government - we want our Denmark back demonstration.
|
Libertarian Socialist.....
Someone who wants to maximize liberty by centralizing all power over material goods. Makes perfect sense.
|
On April 08 2011 08:55 jdseemoreglass wrote:
Libertarian Socialist.....
Someone who wants to maximize liberty by centralizing all power over material goods. Makes perfect sense.
If you don't have to worry about things like money, food, power etc... that leaves all your time for being free! (provided you input the work necessary to earn these things)
I'm not sure whether I'm being serious or not with this.
|
I gotta say I'm completely against socialism and its variant and that I know that free market is the only way to go. Nevertheless, I respect that left winged people always gather/protest w/e in favor of their ideas while us liberals usually never do shit as we should.
U don't see many of this around
![[image loading]](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_j2JafDh3HNs/Sb8cOSqYOZI/AAAAAAAAAJ8/-woRhdfeqV4/s400/capitalism-rocks-protest.jpg)
|
If some people are confused by the concepts maybe this illustration helps:
![[image loading]](http://www.anarchy.no/anorg_e.jpg)
Btw i didnt bold in anarchism, it was how i found it.
buttom left says statism
|
On April 08 2011 09:03 exeexe wrote:If some people are confused by the concepts maybe this illustration helps: Btw i didnt bold in anarchism, it was how i found it. buttom left says statism
For those who are REALLY confused by the concepts, maybe THIS will help:
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/yt0vF.png)
|
On April 08 2011 09:14 jdseemoreglass wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2011 09:03 exeexe wrote:If some people are confused by the concepts maybe this illustration helps: Btw i didnt bold in anarchism, it was how i found it. buttom left says statism For those who are REALLY confused by the concepts, maybe THIS will help: + Show Spoiler +
lol those two graphics are so brainwashing
|
Russian Federation3631 Posts
Anarchists demonstrating for more government spending.....?
I'm a bit confused.
|
Can any free market advocates here qualify what economic freedom is and who benefits from it? Be specific and give examples, if you will.
Thanks.
|
What a strange thing to demonstrate about.
Are they against all capitalism? Just some? How about a tiny sliver?
I'm sure it was fun and all, but an "anti capitalist" demonstration is quite ridiculous. Protesting a particular right-wing government at least is logical, but something as vague and arbitrary as "anti capitalism" can't be taken seriously.
Exeexe, out of curiosity, where there police at the event?
Also, Orwell would be rofl'ing in his grave at the hilarious irony of contemporary Danes arguing for anarchism haha
|
On April 08 2011 09:14 jdseemoreglass wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2011 09:03 exeexe wrote:If some people are confused by the concepts maybe this illustration helps: Btw i didnt bold in anarchism, it was how i found it. buttom left says statism For those who are REALLY confused by the concepts, maybe THIS will help:
I am severely confused by charts that are rotated 45 degrees.
I think the following site gives a very clear explanation: http://www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2
|
On April 08 2011 10:01 MichaelEU wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2011 09:14 jdseemoreglass wrote:On April 08 2011 09:03 exeexe wrote:If some people are confused by the concepts maybe this illustration helps: Btw i didnt bold in anarchism, it was how i found it. buttom left says statism For those who are REALLY confused by the concepts, maybe THIS will help: I am severely confused by charts that are rotated 45 degrees. I think the following site gives a very clear explanation: http://www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2
These charts aren't rotated 45 degrees, they are fundamentally different. The first chart assumes for example that anarchism is closer to socialism than capitalism, which is honestly absurd imo.
To also answer the poster above, capitalism and "economic freedom" are basically euphemisms for a simple idea: VOLUNTARY EXCHANGE. Of course, any economic system which is founded upon voluntary action instead of societally coerced action will be considered to result in "more freedom" or "less oppression" and therefore closer to the true nature of anarchism.
|
On April 08 2011 10:22 jdseemoreglass wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2011 10:01 MichaelEU wrote:On April 08 2011 09:14 jdseemoreglass wrote:On April 08 2011 09:03 exeexe wrote:If some people are confused by the concepts maybe this illustration helps: Btw i didnt bold in anarchism, it was how i found it. buttom left says statism For those who are REALLY confused by the concepts, maybe THIS will help: I am severely confused by charts that are rotated 45 degrees. I think the following site gives a very clear explanation: http://www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2 These charts aren't rotated 45 degrees, they are fundamentally different. The first chart assumes for example that anarchism is closer to socialism than capitalism, which is honestly absurd imo. To also answer the poster above, capitalism and "economic freedom" are basically euphemisms for a simple idea: VOLUNTARY EXCHANGE. Of course, any economic system which is founded upon voluntary action instead of societally coerced action will be considered to result in "more freedom" or "less oppression" and therefore closer to the true nature of anarchism.
I meant that I can't stand charts that are tilted squares.
And I wanted to share a proper lengthy explanation on the political divisions.
|
Last weekend there was a nice anticapitalistic demonstration in the capitol (Copenhagen). Actually there were 2 demonstrations that melted together - "anticapitalistic demonstration" and "get rid of the right wing government - we want our Denmark back demonstration".
Could someone explain to me how these right-wing governments managed to gain so much power in Europe in the first place? It seems really bizzare to me.
|
On April 08 2011 11:06 Ooshmagoosh wrote:Show nested quote +Last weekend there was a nice anticapitalistic demonstration in the capitol (Copenhagen). Actually there were 2 demonstrations that melted together - "anticapitalistic demonstration" and "get rid of the right wing government - we want our Denmark back demonstration". Could someone explain to me how these right-wing governments managed to gain so much power in Europe in the first place? It seems really bizzare to me.
I think it can be described like this but i dont know. Seems hard to describe something that should be happening over the whole European continent:
But something along the line of this. The right wing people somehow managed to set the order of the day in the media and then they deluded the people to think that if they gave up their rights then that would benefit everyone. So a lot of people voulentarily accepted that it would be better to not fight and let the government take control, and then they hoped that if they stayed loyal to the state, then the state would also stay loyal to them. LOL what a joke that was, but thats sort of what happened roughly.
..As the right wing state got enough power it opened the door for capitalism to enter..
And then capitalism got a bridgehead in the society and from here it grew stronger and stronger day by day. once a firm base was established it worked to divide the people not only between rich and poor but forexample also between ethnic european and arabic muslims etc. Because the more divided the people are, the weaker are the people, and the more exploitation can be achieved and subsequently more humans will go thorugh a life full of misery. The people had no idea that they had let a trojan horse inside and that it was already on the run. The people was deluded to beleive that if they harashed the arabic muslims then everything would become better, and the strong capitalist state would remain loyal to the people who helped in this moral case. But little did they know that a capitalist state does not know of such concepts as "thanks" or "owe you a favour", instead what they got was a state that now turned its focus on to the ethnic people, and i guess thats where we are today.
The question is, will people let them self be divided further into smaller groups or will they stand united and repel back what the state let in?
|
I hold my own anti-capitalist demonstration every day by refusing to buy Apple, Adidas or Starbucks. Instead, I invest my money into means of production, which incidentally turns me into a capitalist.
Let it never be claimed that I do not do my fair share in the cause of social progress.
|
cajpitalists want deregulated markets, wages to maximise profits. its good for you, because you will benefit of cheap products due to the competition. LOL
What free market is leading to is mass unemployment. Bosses dont care about people, they care about profit. If they can produce the same prodcut with only 50% of the people )=productivity gain) they will unemploy 50% of them. WHILE the profit is his own.
Communists or socialists want that the economy cant do that. they wawnt the good thing rom competition (productivity) with aboiding the bad )unemployment). The way to go is that the ppl who arent needed anymore (50%) will take the gains from the productivity increase and do something new with it (investing). So no profits, but investing.
If theres no thing to invest, then the 50% ppl would share the work to be done, so the worker hours would be 50% for all the ppl.
|
On April 08 2011 11:06 Ooshmagoosh wrote:Show nested quote +Last weekend there was a nice anticapitalistic demonstration in the capitol (Copenhagen). Actually there were 2 demonstrations that melted together - "anticapitalistic demonstration" and "get rid of the right wing government - we want our Denmark back demonstration". Could someone explain to me how these right-wing governments managed to gain so much power in Europe in the first place? It seems really bizzare to me.
In Norway, at least, it's the result of the 70s and 80s right-wing politics (for anyone knowledgeable - yes, i know AP sat with power most of the time, but the politics still had a strong right-focused touch) and the kids brought up during that age (spoiled and unrealistically inflated value of self), mixed with modern left-wing lax immigration laws and xenophobia. What reason the rest of Europe has I don't know, but I imagine the wave of right-wing politics that took Norway in this period of time also hit other countries, and we're only seeing the true effects on it in our children now.
As for why protest capitalism, there's countless reasons, amongst those how it forcibly creates and sustains vast social and economic differences across the world. Don't get me wrong, capitalism has a lot of positives, but when the system is being abused as-is, and it so negatively impacts the vast majority of the world's population, then it might be time to review the system and figure out a new one.
|
I know it's kind of hard to equate anarchism with socialism, but they share similar characteristics.
The only difference is that anarchists think people will spontaneously collectivize and work together with no outside interference and no incentive framework whatsoever.
|
On April 08 2011 19:58 exeexe wrote:
I think it can be described like this but i dont know. Seems hard to describe something that should be happening over the whole European continent:
But something along the line of this. The right wing people somehow managed to set the order of the day in the media and then they deluded the people to think that if they gave up their rights then that would benefit everyone. So a lot of people voulentarily accepted that it would be better to not fight and let the government take control, and then they hoped that if they stayed loyal to the state, then the state would also stay loyal to them. LOL what a joke that was, but thats sort of what happened roughly.
..As the right wing state got enough power it opened the door for capitalism to enter..
And then capitalism got a bridgehead in the society and from here it grew stronger and stronger day by day. once a firm base was established it worked to divide the people not only between rich and poor but forexample also between ethnic european and arabic muslims etc. Because the more divided the people are, the weaker are the people, and the more exploitation can be achieved and subsequently more humans will go thorugh a life full of misery. The people had no idea that they had let a trojan horse inside and that it was already on the run. The people was deluded to beleive that if they harashed the arabic muslims then everything would become better, and the strong capitalist state would remain loyal to the people who helped in this moral case. But little did they know that a capitalist state does not know of such concepts as "thanks" or "owe you a favour", instead what they got was a state that now turned its focus on to the ethnic people, and i guess thats where we are today.
The question is, will people let them self be divided further into smaller groups or will they stand united and repel back what the state let in?
Oh my god.
On April 08 2011 22:26 laee wrote:
cajpitalists want deregulated markets, wages to maximise profits. its good for you, because you will benefit of cheap products due to the competition. LOL
What free market is leading to is mass unemployment. Bosses dont care about people, they care about profit. If they can produce the same prodcut with only 50% of the people )=productivity gain) they will unemploy 50% of them. WHILE the profit is his own.
Communists or socialists want that the economy cant do that. they wawnt the good thing rom competition (productivity) with aboiding the bad )unemployment). The way to go is that the ppl who arent needed anymore (50%) will take the gains from the productivity increase and do something new with it (investing). So no profits, but investing.
If theres no thing to invest, then the 50% ppl would share the work to be done, so the worker hours would be 50% for all the ppl.
Even more Oh my god. Please stop doing anything political, if you have so much clue (=none).
The reason for the right-wing movement in Europe is Xenophobia and massive uncontrolled immigration. People here are conservative (because Europe's average age is very high) and fear the new and unknown. Media did the rest after 9/11. Capitalism has nothing to do with it.
And for Mr. IwantthatBossesemploy50%uselessworkers. WTF DUDE? was my first reaction, but let's be fair and get reasonable. If I can do something by my own, I should do it by my own (like peeing for example), am I a dick because i didn't hire a nurse? Intuitive Answer = No, right answer = no. Now just extrapolate from that. Also before you help others, you should always check that you don't hurt yourself in the process ( like getting financially unstable ). Same concept can be applied here, if I "help" people by employing them despite uselessness I will get bancrupt = No jobs at all anymore T_T
|
thats why its called socialism. it cares about ppl and dont want them to starve because of "LOLWTF IDONTCAREABOUTYOU I WANT CHEEEAP!!" ppl.
Btw you seem to entirely not understand my point. 1. If theres nothing ppl would need any more, the progress would not result in useless work but in reduction of working hours. 2. You wont go bunkrupt if you enhance productivity and simultaneously dont enhance your profit but your investment / reduce working hours.
|
On April 08 2011 08:55 jdseemoreglass wrote:
Libertarian Socialist.....
Someone who wants to maximize liberty by centralizing all power over material goods. Makes perfect sense.
Uh huh. The US brain washing mechanism is pretty effective huh?
Most socialists want greater welfare given to the disadvantaged and greater social equality for all. Capitalist countries are marked by social inequality (the flip side is the "incentive" viewpoint), i.e. the rich accumulating power over the poor. Socialists believe in greater government control over the markets to prevent market failure and undesirable market results. They believe that a sacrifice in economy is worth the benefits in the standard of life of the average person that some government control can bring.
I'm not going to get political but I just want to point out that the stereotypes fed by the American media aren't necessarily the best way to contribute to intelligent discussion. Indeed, one can say that the last few financial crises were largely driven by misregulation/over-deregulation (i.e. failed capitalism/too much capitalism).
|
On April 08 2011 22:26 laee wrote:
cajpitalists want deregulated markets, wages to maximise profits. its good for you, because you will benefit of cheap products due to the competition. LOL
What free market is leading to is mass unemployment. Bosses dont care about people, they care about profit. If they can produce the same prodcut with only 50% of the people )=productivity gain) they will unemploy 50% of them. WHILE the profit is his own.
Communists or socialists want that the economy cant do that. they wawnt the good thing rom competition (productivity) with aboiding the bad )unemployment). The way to go is that the ppl who arent needed anymore (50%) will take the gains from the productivity increase and do something new with it (investing). So no profits, but investing.
If theres no thing to invest, then the 50% ppl would share the work to be done, so the worker hours would be 50% for all the ppl. Wage is profit.
There. Marxism debunked, the fallacies of demonizing profit debunked, a lot of leftist moral premises debunked. All in one three word sentence. And to be realist, that sentence is true, which leaves little else for discussion.
To be more percise, wage is a subset of profits that have no money cost of labour. Where the universal definition of profit is the money cost of producing a good subtracted from the money revenue from sale of good
Most socialists want greater welfare given to the disadvantaged and greater social equality for all. Capitalist countries are marked by social inequality (the flip side is the "incentive" viewpoint), i.e. the rich accumulating power over the poor. Socialists believe in greater government control over the markets to prevent market failure and undesirable market results. They believe that a sacrifice in economy is worth the benefits in the standard of life of the average person that some government control can bring. Equality cannot exist, discrimination cannot be eliminated, property ALL MUST EXIST due to one single reason. The scarcity of time and space. Thats it! We live in a scarce world, and thus those are the implications we must necessarily face, whatever the policies in place are. By the way, government is a subset of the market(it is namely the market of trading tax payer money in exchange of government assurance to not use violence, or some similar scheme depending on technicalities), hence the claim of it being a fix to markets is nonsensical.
|
On April 09 2011 03:39 xarthaz wrote:
Wage is profit.
There. Marxism debunked, the fallacies of demonizing profit debunked, a lot of leftist moral premises debunked. All in one three word sentence. And to be realist, that sentence is true, which leaves little else for discussion.
To be more percise, wage is a subset of profits that have no money cost of labour. Where the universal definition of profit is the money cost of producing a good subtracted from the money revenue from sale of good
Nice you give another reason why capitalism sucks.
If "wages" concentrate to a few ppl (you will not deny this?) the economy is dependend of the spenditure of these ppl. (to get the money back in the system for wages, profit). Thats stupid because they cant spend billions so the overall demand drops (less work, wages, profit).
What to say more, than "Bosses don't care".
Equality cannot exist, discrimination cannot be eliminated, property ALL MUST EXIST due to one single reason. The scarcity of time and space. Thats it! We live in a scarce world, and thus those are the implications we must necessarily face, whatever the policies in place are. By the way, government is a subset of the market(it is namely the market of trading tax payer money in exchange of government assurance to not use violence, or some similar scheme depending on technicalities), hence the claim of it being a fix to markets is nonsensical.
regulation is nonsensical lol.
|
On April 09 2011 03:39 xarthaz wrote:
We live in a scarce world, and thus
i see people use this assumption a lot, it's completely baseless
|
On April 09 2011 03:26 tyCe wrote:
Socialists believe in greater government control over the markets to prevent market failure and undesirable market results.
As for your statement, it needs a refinement which the following shows:
This is where differences in socialism begin to emerge. Should a government control the means of production or should only certain industries be under such control? Should the people control the means of production more than a government? Do people who control production plan in advance for what they will produce or do they look at what the market demands and produce accordingly?
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-socialism.htm
And i may add should there be a government at all, would there be a need for it?
As you can see socialism is not a predefined absolute thing.
They believe that a sacrifice in economy
No the only that will see a sacrifice are the rich. The economy will get hurt but only until everything has been normalised again. Thats expected, no matter what transition you are doing and has nothing to do with socialism but because the society is transitioning.
|
On April 09 2011 04:39 qdenser wrote:i see people use this assumption a lot, it's completely baseless
Maybe in USSR it is.
|
I think Socialism has some good points, but as a basic system capitalism and markets are the way to go. The financial crisis was btw. formed by the gov themselves due to wrong signals to the market (lending people money who can't afford to pay back for political reasons = "everyone should own a house" )
But i am myself not so much a fan of this radical lean gov that republicans always want to have.
Also i don't believe the gov is a market, i think it should not be a player in the economy. This is in my opinion true for all countries in the world, i believe there should be only one tax base and only one tax rate. States who are rivaling themselves with lower tax rates or subsidies are bad for the overall welfare of the world (again, only my opinion).
|
Socialism and capitalism don't have to be separate. I don't understand where people get the idea that they have to be. There's nothing polarising about the issue if you use your noggin.
|
On April 09 2011 01:47 SkytoM wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2011 19:58 exeexe wrote:
I think it can be described like this but i dont know. Seems hard to describe something that should be happening over the whole European continent:
But something along the line of this. The right wing people somehow managed to set the order of the day in the media and then they deluded the people to think that if they gave up their rights then that would benefit everyone. So a lot of people voulentarily accepted that it would be better to not fight and let the government take control, and then they hoped that if they stayed loyal to the state, then the state would also stay loyal to them. LOL what a joke that was, but thats sort of what happened roughly.
..As the right wing state got enough power it opened the door for capitalism to enter..
And then capitalism got a bridgehead in the society and from here it grew stronger and stronger day by day. once a firm base was established it worked to divide the people not only between rich and poor but forexample also between ethnic european and arabic muslims etc. Because the more divided the people are, the weaker are the people, and the more exploitation can be achieved and subsequently more humans will go thorugh a life full of misery. The people had no idea that they had let a trojan horse inside and that it was already on the run. The people was deluded to beleive that if they harashed the arabic muslims then everything would become better, and the strong capitalist state would remain loyal to the people who helped in this moral case. But little did they know that a capitalist state does not know of such concepts as "thanks" or "owe you a favour", instead what they got was a state that now turned its focus on to the ethnic people, and i guess thats where we are today.
The question is, will people let them self be divided further into smaller groups or will they stand united and repel back what the state let in? Oh my god.
Watch this video:
http://www.democracynow.org/2011/4/7/nobel_economist_joseph_stiglitz_assault_on
Right, did Nobel Economist Joseph Stiglitz just said that the US was more fractionated than Europe? Oh shit, i beleive that he infact did!! And a fractionated society is the same as a people that is divided, and where is capitalism strongest? In the US! Now go connect the dots...
Joseph Stiglitz also wrote this interesting article about the distribution of wealth in the US for those who wants to read more:
http://www.vanityfair.com/society/features/2011/05/top-one-percent-201105?currentPage=1
Its very funny, because he forgets to use the word socialism. Aah well i guess he went to american schools and perhaps there he learned that socialism is the same as hell on earth, but he could easily have included the term socialism in the article if he had enough cojones.
|
The part where Communists suddenly come out of nowhere amuses me. The idea of Communists just waiting for a protest to latch onto is funny to me.
Also wow, a political/economic debate, what an unexpected turn of events 
|
On April 10 2011 01:13 exeexe wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2011 01:47 SkytoM wrote:On April 08 2011 19:58 exeexe wrote:
I think it can be described like this but i dont know. Seems hard to describe something that should be happening over the whole European continent:
But something along the line of this. The right wing people somehow managed to set the order of the day in the media and then they deluded the people to think that if they gave up their rights then that would benefit everyone. So a lot of people voulentarily accepted that it would be better to not fight and let the government take control, and then they hoped that if they stayed loyal to the state, then the state would also stay loyal to them. LOL what a joke that was, but thats sort of what happened roughly.
..As the right wing state got enough power it opened the door for capitalism to enter..
And then capitalism got a bridgehead in the society and from here it grew stronger and stronger day by day. once a firm base was established it worked to divide the people not only between rich and poor but forexample also between ethnic european and arabic muslims etc. Because the more divided the people are, the weaker are the people, and the more exploitation can be achieved and subsequently more humans will go thorugh a life full of misery. The people had no idea that they had let a trojan horse inside and that it was already on the run. The people was deluded to beleive that if they harashed the arabic muslims then everything would become better, and the strong capitalist state would remain loyal to the people who helped in this moral case. But little did they know that a capitalist state does not know of such concepts as "thanks" or "owe you a favour", instead what they got was a state that now turned its focus on to the ethnic people, and i guess thats where we are today.
The question is, will people let them self be divided further into smaller groups or will they stand united and repel back what the state let in? Oh my god. Watch this video: http://www.democracynow.org/2011/4/7/nobel_economist_joseph_stiglitz_assault_onRight, did Nobel Economist Joseph Stiglitz just said that the US was more fractionated than Europe? Oh shit, i beleive that he infact did!! And a fractionated society is the same as a people that is divided, and where is capitalism strongest? In the US! Now go connect the dots... Joseph Stiglitz also wrote this interesting article about the distribution of wealth in the US for those who wants to read more: http://www.vanityfair.com/society/features/2011/05/top-one-percent-201105?currentPage=1Its very funny, because he forgets to use the word socialism. Aah well i guess he went to american schools and perhaps there he learned that socialism is the same as hell on earth, but he could easily have included the term socialism in the article if he had enough cojones.
I had no problem with that part of your sayings.. Also you mention in first lines of your post that you will talk about "what should happen all over europe".. now your post is all about US? Idk..
"The right wing people somehow managed to set the order of the day in the media and then they deluded the people to think that if they gave up their rights then that would benefit everyone."
sounds like a conspiracy theory for me.. and I think that's just dumb
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://www.greatergoodsonline.com/shop/images/Rainbowpeace.jpg)
