3 votes

Zeitgeist, Occupy... and the Liberty movement?

I'm not claiming to understand the entire motivation of the Occupy or the Zeitgest movements although from what I understand they are not all that different from each other. When it comes to civil liberties and social policy like abolition, gay marriage, abortion, etc. they don't seem so different from any of us on their differing opinions.I also feel like many of them many of them favor a Ron Paul non-interventionalist strategy of foreign policy.

It seems that most of them also understand that monetary policy in the US is immoral. That is they can understand the scheme that is the Federal Reserve and can get behind abolishing it.

What they don't seem to understand though is that free market capitalism is not the cause of this countries problems. They see a desire to acquire wealth as immoral and that people should be limited as to what they can earn in order to try and provide for the suffering that exists. They feel motivation to work, and achieve, and invent, comes from within a person and that rewards are just a secondary consideration, and therefore wealth does nothing to hamper human progress and achievement.

So how do you make them understand that the free market economy in itself is not the cause of corruption rather it is the corrupt abusing power to manipulate the free market in order to profit that is the problem? It seems like this one issue is all that is keeping the Liberty movement from exploding with supporters. Anyone agree?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

You waste our time

You are wrong.

There's your argument right there, nothing else. Nothing to back it up with, no details, just you saying that I am wrong.

I have said nothing that is un-factual and have denied nothing that is established fact, otherwise you could point it out and answer my questions.

A corporation is a made up entity, it CANNOT operate by itself. PEOPLE have to make decisions for the corporation. Not sure what you don't get about that. I would ask again what "special rights" a corporation has in a free market, or what advantage a corp has over other business entities in a free market, but you don't answer my questions anyway. So quit wasting our time please, if you can refute what I've stated then do so. If your argument is as it has been, simply: You are wrong, then go about your business and quit wasting our time.

Some would argue with your statement

that there's nothing wrong with corporations in a free market. I would say that there's nothing wrong with businesses growing large but when you invoke the entity of a corporation, there are many things that skew the market.

Corporations were never meant to become living entities. They just existed for the short duration of one event. Over time, they have been manipulated into becoming living, breathing monsters. The banks did this so they could both remove accountability and buy their profits. This is done by mandating a board of directors (which the "lenders" always seem to maintain control of) and by monopolizing the preferred shares in. With control of the money and the 'behind closed doors' power, they can both rob every spare dime from them and compromise any ethical decision in favor of the almighty short term profit. Just take a look at that map showing the owners of the owners of the owners of all the top 4,000 multinational corporations. They're banks. Need I say more?

Privately held, locally accountable businesses are much more competitive in the market place but they don't hold the clout to survive like a corporation does. Often because the owner has principles.