"Occupy" Protests

You should've seem of my previous posts. If you think I'm not a pretty damn angry leftist who hasn't spewed venom at companies, CEOs and greed.....ask any of the libertarians, they'll gladly tell you how I feel.

I do see what your doing, largely ignoring points being made so I really don't want to believe or even acknowledge anything you say. I don't doubt your sincerity but it is an act still.
You never answered me.
Doc.
If someone came by and destroyed your property you would not care?

Answer it.
All I have in my room really is a TV, PS3 and games, my laptop, ipod a guitar and a bookshelf.
I dont really want much in life,  mainly to enjoy myself and be a good person.
But if you came by, took those things and sent it into a crusher....I would want to punch you in the face and probably call for your arrest.

And dont give me some more leftist talk, because that's not the point I'm making. I think you're mistaking my realism and not being a tool for something else, I am a pretty dedicated lefist


Edited by JJLehto - November 21 2011 at 18:33

JJLehto wrote: You should've seem of my previous posts. If you think I'm not a pretty damn angry leftist who hasn't spewed venom at companies, CEOs and greed.....ask any of the libertarians, they'll gladly tell you how I feel. I do see what your doing, largely ignoring points being made so I really don't want to believe or even acknowledge anything you say. I don't doubt your sincerity but it is an act still. You never answered me. Doc. If someone came by and destroyed your property you would not care? Answer it. All I have in my room really is a TV, PS3 and games, my laptop, ipod a guitar and a bookshelf. I dont really want much in life,  mainly to enjoy myself and be a good person. But if you came by, took those things and sent it into a crusher....I would want to punch you in the face and probably call for your arrest. And dont give me some more leftist talk, because that's not the point I'm making. I think you're mistaking my realism and not being a tool for something else, I am a pretty dedicated lefist

I already said I would be angry if someone say destroyed my CD collection.  But my point was that doesn't mean they should be pepper-sprayed, kicked and beaten because they did so.  Arrested, sure.  Made to pay restitution, sure. Beaten, absolutely not.  Property is not as valuable as human beings.  And to equate (not saying you are doing it), destruction of property to violence against human beings is wrong. 

Epignosis wrote: The Doctor wrote: Epignosis wrote: I meant to ask you this Doc, since you seem to paint rich folk with the same brush: They got where they are by abusing the lower classes. What if I write a series of books that become international bestsellers?  And I wrote them just so I can hoard my wealth (and buy beer).  Would you think ill of me? I think hoarding wealth is selfish and greedy.  At least hoarding more than you would need to ensure security and a decent existence, so yes, I would think ill of you.  However, most authors are not shipping jobs overseas or underpaying employees (usually because they don't have any).  So how you became rich is more respectable than most Wall Streeters, CEOs and bankers.  But still, hoarding is wrong.  If I chose not to write novels and depended on government assistance, would I be selfish and greedy then?

If you chose (with emphasis on the word chose here) not to work at all, then you might be selfish perhaps, and a tad on the lazy side, but saying a person is being greedy simply because he/she wants the necessities of survival (no matter who is paying for them) I would disagree with.

The Doctor wrote: Epignosis wrote: The Doctor wrote: Epignosis wrote: I meant to ask you this Doc, since you seem to paint rich folk with the same brush: They got where they are by abusing the lower classes. What if I write a series of books that become international bestsellers?  And I wrote them just so I can hoard my wealth (and buy beer).  Would you think ill of me? I think hoarding wealth is selfish and greedy.  At least hoarding more than you would need to ensure security and a decent existence, so yes, I would think ill of you.  However, most authors are not shipping jobs overseas or underpaying employees (usually because they don't have any).  So how you became rich is more respectable than most Wall Streeters, CEOs and bankers.  But still, hoarding is wrong.  If I chose not to write novels and depended on government assistance, would I be selfish and greedy then? If you chose (with emphasis on the word chose here) not to work at all, then you might be selfish perhaps, and a tad on the lazy side, but saying a person is being greedy simply because he/she wants the necessities of survival (no matter who is paying for them) I would disagree with.

If a person is so lazy he refuses to cook a meal and eat it, would you have the government force food down his throat?  (Serious question- I'm curious how far you take governmental intervention)

The Doctor wrote: I think hoarding wealth is selfish and greedy.  At least hoarding more than you would need to ensure security and a decent existence

Sounds like the devil's in the details.

The Doctor wrote: I think the aristocracy hoarding wealth and stealing it from labor needs to be stopped.  Let's start pepper spraying, kicking and beating the Wall Street aristocracy, as well as corporate CEOs and bankers.  That would be real justice,  if we're equating property as being as important as human life, health and dignity (a real problem here in the US, we place far too high a premium on stuff and too little value on people).

I would hardly call store owners "Aristocracy"... In fact, I wouldn't call them that at all.

If you want to talk about human life, health, and dignity, is throwing sh*t through a store window going to threaten human life? Possibly. Human health? Definitely. There'll be glass everywhere; people could get cut. Dignity? I hardly see how it's dignified to throw stuff through a window like a little baby. Not to mention the store owners lose business when stuff like that happens. They have to patch things up, people might be afraid it's going to happen again and not shop there, merchandise might get destroyed, etc.

When people protest something, that's one thing. When people protest things like 3 year old moronic BABIES, that's another.

TheMasterMofo wrote: The Doctor wrote: I think the aristocracy hoarding wealth and stealing it from labor needs to be stopped.  Let's start pepper spraying, kicking and beating the Wall Street aristocracy, as well as corporate CEOs and bankers.  That would be real justice,  if we're equating property as being as important as human life, health and dignity (a real problem here in the US, we place far too high a premium on stuff and too little value on people).  I would hardly call store owners "Aristocracy"... In fact, I wouldn't call them that at all. If you want to talk about human life, health, and dignity, is throwing sh*t through a store window going to threaten human life? Possibly. Human health? Definitely. There'll be glass everywhere; people could get cut. Dignity? I hardly see how it's dignified to throw stuff through a window like a little baby. Not to mention the store owners lose business when stuff like that happens. They have to patch things up, people might be afraid it's going to happen again and not shop there, merchandise might get destroyed, etc. When people protest something, that's one thing. When people protest things like 3 year old moronic BABIES, that's another.

You can only push people down so far and for so long before they fight back.  And when they do, it isn't always pretty.  And it isn't always 100% peaceful.  Nor would completely peaceful protest accomplish anything, as the aristocracy doesn't care if the people are angry.  They will only care when their wealth and power are threatened.  I will agree with you on one point though, if they are taking out their anger on small shop owners that is wrong.  They should be taking their anger out on the bigger fish. 

JJLehto wrote: Catcher10 wrote: We are all different and have different feelings about what is moral, right or wrong.......I would never desecrate our flag, I can't begin to think of any reason for me to approve of that, it would be immoral to me.   Why does someone have to stoop so low as to break windows, damage someone elses property to attempt to get their point accross? Makes me not pay attention to them....ever. All of these things add up to crossing the line to a peaceful protest.......It now does not mean what it did 2 months ago, to most people.   Nor would I, and again...you say "approve" like I want people to go around burning flags...but I do know why I'm OK with allowing it and to be honest, can't imagine why you would not be. Frankly, wanting to outlaw flag burning seems Un-American to me. I only wish I could have a way to say this publicly and see the reaction Indeed, people are stupid. Stupid and restless, and angry. It's why every protest goes bad, and why every revolution goes bad, and if you do somehow take power you just become the man yourself. We really are dumb beasts sometimes. Doc, kinda arguing one of those unimportant points. Does it really matter if destroying property is actually violence or not? Point is, it should not be allowed. If you want to say otherwise it is grade A   bullcrap. These are about fairness and being treated well right? So forcing damage upon someone innocent is really the way to go

Choosing words is difficult. I don't think its ok to burn the American flag. This is not black and white, it will never be, unless the govt passes a law that says you cannot destroy the flag in any manner. Which I believe almost passed a few years ago??.......And I agree, I don't think such a law would ever pass, nor should it since that would go against freedom of speech.

Slartibartfast wrote: When you get more bothered about people trashing property than people being trashed by police there is something seriously wrong here.

If someone came into my house and trashed it and the police showed up and trashed him, I am more bothered by the former than by the latter.

The Doctor wrote: You can only push people down so far and for so long before they fight back.  And when they do, it isn't always pretty.  And it isn't always 100% peaceful.  Nor would completely peaceful protest accomplish anything, as the aristocracy doesn't care if the people are angry.  They will only care when their wealth and power are threatened.  I will agree with you on one point though, if they are taking out their anger on small shop owners that is wrong.  They should be taking their anger out on the bigger fish.

Well, that's exactly my issue there. If you're protesting Wall Street, go damage Wall Street! Protests don't always have to be peaceful... Sometimes they NEED to be violent. The violence has to be directed in the right place, though.
Personally I think that Wall Street shouldn't be what's being protested, though. Wall Street and the U.S. Government are equally to blame for most of the mess in America right now. The protesting ought to be to both of them.

Slartibartfast wrote: When you get more bothered about people trashing property than people being trashed by police there is something seriously wrong here. It is perfectly OK to burn an American flag if it's your property.  After all China will make more for us.  If you value the piece of cloth more than the principles it stands for, once again something seriously wrong.

Eh, there's not something wrong if the people deserve being trashed. I'm not following any of the specific stories with all this occupation BS, so if the people were TRULY innocent of all wrong doing then yeah, the police were wrong. I don't really care though because from what I've heard, "occupiers" have thrown stuff not only at buildings, but at police, too. I don't know about you, but if people threw crap at me, I'd probably pepper spray them, too. Unfortunately the only pepper spray I carry is actually not spray at all, but is instead a 9mm.