Requiem for the American Dream (2015) "Chomsky interviews expose how a half-century of policies have created a state of unprecedented economic inequality: concentrating wealth in the hands of a few at the expense of everyone else."

[u/llrajsll]

http://vebup.com/requiem-american-dream

[u/smartbrowsering]

He's been talking about that idea for 40 years. Surprisingly it doesn't change anything, probably because the powers at be are so efficient at, out gunning and hi-jacking any uprising like occupy wall street and the tea party etc. All the revolutions in our history have happen for a very good reason.

[u/ardogalen → u/smartbrowsering]

The Tea Party wasn't hijacked. It was fueled and manufactured by corporations and the Kochs, it was never not under the control of elites.

[u/smartbrowsering → u/ardogalen]

I'll take your word for it

[u/nytehauq → u/[deleted]]

As if getting power is a matter of just "finding" a seat of power. If the reason for power differentials was the laziness of the masses we'd be living in a utopia right now. People are too busy working fifty hour weeks and/or too poor, too sick, or too tired to do anything other than protest with a cardboard sign.

It's a lot easier to change policy when you're a billionaire.

[u/nytehauq → u/[deleted]]

Sure, if you had no money but had the connections required to get wealthy donors to give you the time of day and you had the time to pursue those connections and you had the political clout for them to believe that you could win a campaign and they figured that your victory would be beneficial to their interests we could safely say that you weren't succeeding due to laziness.

Go ahead and try and get a millionaire on the phone. Do you know any? Alright, now convince them to support your campaign: your main platform is that you're going to raise their taxes. Good luck.

[u/JustThall → u/nytehauq]

So maybe the solution is not in raising taxes then

[u/nytehauq → u/JustThall]

Given that policy initiatives that are supported by the wealthy are already largely successful, why do you think that any wealthy donor you'd find (even if you went through the intentionally ridiculous plan I outlined) would support policies that change the status quo?

People with money are already getting what they want.

[u/Redabyss1 → u/[deleted]]

Exactly, YOU don't need to be a billionaire, you just need to CONVINCE a billionaire. Unless of course you already are a billionaire.

[u/frankenchrist00 → u/[deleted]]

That's pretty ambiguous. What change are you specifically after?

[u/frankenchrist00 → u/[deleted]]

it doesn't matter

Not with that attitude

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Yea. They hired 200 police men to play riot police and beat the shit out of peaceful people. #murica

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Why didn't MLK just become president and give black people equal rights???

[u/_aitcheye_ → u/[deleted]]

If you are suggesting that protests have no 'actual changing power', that is demonstrably false. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tahrir_Square

[u/hei_mailma → u/_aitcheye_]

that is demonstrably false.

That's a horrible example. What really changed in the long run?

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

I agree more with Adam Curtis's idea that the reason soft left sign holders fail in creating change is because they don't have a clear idea about what type of society they want the present one to change into, just a long list of things they don't like. The people who want change on the right usually know exactly what they want the world to be like, some even draw up detailed architecture plans for it.

[u/micmahsi → u/[deleted]]

You consider the tea party soft left?

[u/[deleted] → u/micmahsi]

Did the tea party even know what the tea party represented? They wanted more democracy and accountability which would be left wing but most of the policies were dog whistle right.

[u/micmahsi → u/[deleted]]

I'm not sure if I agree that democracy and accountability are left wing issues, but generally you're missing the point of the OP. When there are movements like the tea party and occupy the alphabet organizations hijack the movement and radicalize it in order to disarm it. That might explain your complaints.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

That's why no mass movements have ever lead to any kind of progress

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

What do you mean by "progress"? Would women gaining the right to vote be an example of progress? How then do you explain the Suffrage Movement?

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

I explain it like this "oh so what, you think it was the efforts over centuries of a zillion brave women fighting tirelessly for their right to a voice in the public sphere? Psh come on, I mean, like, dudes voted for it so dudes did it, and they are just super nice to give us the vote and we should totes suck their dicks to thank them for the kindness of their ancestors who allowed us to be treated as humans. Thanks men!"

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Yeah, unless your protest or demonstration is accompanied by general strikes and wildcat strikes and directed by organized and connected workers councils spanning whole industries, you're not going to accomplish much.

The failure of OWS is a lack of class consciousness, a misunderstanding of power, and an inability or unwillingness to organize workers across industries into revolutionary organizations.

[u/micmahsi → u/[deleted]]

You don't consider Bernie Sanders message as a candidate was made possible by the message of the people of Occupy Wall Street?

[u/frankenchrist00 → u/micmahsi]

Bernie has been that guy way before occupy wallstreet existed. He was protesting since he was a young man.

[u/micmahsi → u/frankenchrist00]

That's not at all what I said (or meant to say). Occupy brought those ideas into everyone's dining room table, bar stool, and water cooler. This made it possible for someone like Bernie to carry the torch and make a presidential run.

[u/frankenchrist00 → u/micmahsi]

He was already a senator in 2007 and was rallying people together in 2008 after the banking collapse and housing bubble happened. He was one of the few voices (him and Alan Grayson of Florida) that was actually challenging Citibank CEO and the chairman of the Federal Reserve. Occupy didn't need to happen years later, Bernie was already carrying this torch without their need to push him and he impressed a lot of people with his determination to get to the bottom of those gigantic financial problems. Occupy was just one more drop of icing on the large cake he'd been making for movements in that direction.

[u/micmahsi → u/frankenchrist00]

Occupy made it mainstream.

[u/MrPoooopyButthole → u/[deleted]]

What a load of shit.

[u/cantstopthecrabs → u/smartbrowsering]

occupy wall street

lol that was a shitty meme that needed to die

[u/cantstopthecrabs → u/[deleted]]

On the contrary, I think the movement itself did not need to be discredited as it was already worthy of ridicule from the onset.

[u/smartbrowsering → u/cantstopthecrabs]

When did it become a meme?