Occupy Wall St Ad: I want Socialism

This is an Occupy Wall Street ad I found on YouTube that sounds like it was directed right from the White House:

Comment Policy: Please read our comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.

52 thoughts on “Occupy Wall St Ad: I want Socialism

  1. I’m sorry. I’m sure I’m throwing myself to the wolves by saying this, but I’m yet to see anybody here actually make a real argument for why socialism is bad, why the Occupiers are in the wrong, or why a system in which the people have more control over government is supposed to somehow make for an oppressive regime. I would appreciate it if you could maintain a civil discourse in your arguments, as I will try to do in mine, but I really can not fathom how anything said here is supposed to pass as an argument, when so far everything has come down to hearsay, anecdotal evidence, and personal conviction. Meanwhile, the facts are in glaring opposition.

    First of all, there’s a LOT of misinformation running around about exactly what socialism even is. Socialism is not, as people have suggested, some political ideology which seeks to assert strict, authoritative, autocratic rule over the people. It is actually an economic system, advocating a co-operative approach to resource ownership and a sharing of the means of production more evenly. In a socialist economy, the people have more of a direct hand in the distribution of goods, and their management, effectively allowing consumers to have more of what we currently call “purchasing power,” which in turn allows for a more democratic, people-oriented use of the goods. Based on this definition, neither Nazis, the Soviet Union, Cuba, or Korea were socialist countries. They might like to say they are to garner public support, but this is just like saying we are a “free market” to appease the masses, even when corporate money dictates the actions of the government (Obama, Bush, Clinton, and even Reagan notwithstanding). This illusion I have mentioned is the same reason you see the government keep funding big businesses and bailing out banks, even when those particular enterprises do nothing for the US as a whole. It is entirely possible to live in a democracy AND a socialist economy, and conflating the two leads to a myriad of problems, particularly the idea that somehow a Socialist methodology is “evil”, when in fact it is simply a system trying to aim at being equal, and providing services that attempt (and often succeed) at benefiting everybody.

    What’s more, a majority of Americans actually want Socialism; most of them just don’t want to admit it. When surveyed in a Duke/Harvard co-opted study, 92% of Americans believed in the Swedish model of income distribution and management–by all means one of the most successful, prosperous, and above all happy socialist democracies in the world. This same group, bizarrely enough, also said they disliked “socialism”, highly indicative of the training people receive to discredit something they know almost nothing about, a sad remnant of our stint in the Cold War. The idea that socialism had to be bad was borne of a period where the United States felt like if they were to admit the Russians did anything better, they would lose support (point of order, Soviet goods were and are some of the longest-lasting and most efficient goods available, largely because the government didn’t have the resources to afford anything less than durable, yet Americans were led in the Cold War to believe they were inferior and cheap by comparison to newer, flashier American tech). Don’t get me wrong, the Soviets and other “communist” countries (again, not an accurate use of the word, but it’s the most familiar version anyway) messed it up big time by choosing autocracy and centralized government over democracy, but that’s a problem of political failure over economic failure. The current generation is losing the bias of the Cold War, and can see now what the benefits and downsides are more clearly, allowing them to choose for themselves. Democracy is based on majority opinions, and for a bunch of people talking about freedom (I’ve seen it come up a dozen times at least in this discussion alone), letting the people choose what they want is the essential definition of freedom.

    And they’ve chosen; in a large majority, the US population lies in solidarity with the Occupiers; and in an even more overwhelming majority, polls show the US wants socialist services increased, including Medicare, Social Security, pensions, etc. for the people out there who keep saying “if you don’t like it, leave,” I will try and stay away form how totally fallacious that argument is and see how it feels when used against you to demonstrate my point: you live in a country which in a majority sense advocates socialism, so why don’t you go somewhere else? Somewhere like Iceland, perhaps?

    Iceland is that conveniently forgotten country in the north of Europe where the “free market” system failed. The government nationalized and de-regulated banks and industry in a rapid, short period, creating what was essentially the world’s first truly free, completely unregulated economy. At first it boomed, with stocks soaring and Iceland shooting to the top as the wealthiest country (per capita) in the world. Then, roughly 2-3 years later, the entire economy collapsed in a hyper-exaggerated version of our own collapse. The problem here is that they didn’t do anything wrong, not by free market standards. In fact, conservative economists were rallying at the success of the free market until they conveniently ignored its downfall. Iceland has had the second worst economic meltdown of all time (per capita), and most economists now admit the failure was as the direct result of free market economics.

    I could make points like these all day, but I’ve got to run and grab dinner. I wanted to end by addressing something that really irked me, though, and that was the gentleman who said re-distributing the wealth wouldn’t help anybody. If you take the amount in bailouts given so far (think trillions), then divide it by the number of people living below the poverty line in our country, we could have given every poor person in America somewhere in the ballpark of $200,000+. If that isn’t a powerful “redistribution” of wealth that can change lives in an instant, then I think your definiton of “help” is incredibly flawed.

    (Please note I’m an Independent, not a Democrat, because they’re just as corrupt and scummy as the Republicans and the rest of them, and at the end of the day they all work for the same companies anyway)

    1. There’s a lot of people that don’t want the responsibility of owning and managing a business (that’s why less than 10% of Americans are business owners), BUT it seems there are a lot of people that want all the benefits of owning a business (like deciding how much you pay yourself). If they had what it takes to run or manage a business, they’d already have one.

      You can’t have it both ways. You either bust your tail, risk it all, and pray your business is a success in a free market economy where everyone has opportunity, or you continue to go to your 9-5 job and hope you don’t overspend you’re entire life so you can never retire. I wouldn’t call that subduing the earth or prospering by any definition. America guarantees equal opportunities, not equal outcomes. It’s up to YOU to do something with your life; being handed free crap your whole life isn’t going to make you a better person or a happier person; it just makes you spoiled and apathetic, and it makes America regressive, because if the opportunity to succeed and make more for yourself and your family isn’t there, then why bust your butt at all if you can do the bare minimum and reap the same reward?

      Giving someone 200k isn’t going to make them wealthy. It makes them temporarily rich. They go out and spend half of it on a fancy car they couldn’t afford to repair, and the other half on lobster dinners and a designer wardrobe; they wouldn’t invest it or use it to make more money because they have no concept of how wealth is created. No one can create it for you.

      1. I’m sorry if you misunderstood me, which it appears you did. I’m not saying that giving the poor money would make them wealthy, I said it would help them. And that’s the truth. While I’m sure many of them would go out and buy things they don’t need, I’d also wager they would have used it to help them get out of debt, which is what bailout money is for. And while it is hyperbolic of me to insist we should have given them the bailout money, I was attempting to make a point about how the current system focuses on saving the wealthy while the poor barely scrape by.

        And again, you have misdirected my argument, built a straw-man, and attempted to argue it to death, conveniently ignoring the argument I first issued. You have gone on to argue that the average person wants the benefits of running a business, like naming their own pay, but without actually having to run one; not only does this argument have no basis in relation to my own, it is false. The average American doesn’t want to own a business, the average American wants Opportunity, a chance at actually achieving the dreams they have in a system which increasingly diminishes those chances. Conservatives are notoriously afraid of the phrase “equal opportunity,” but in this case it applies; the American people want the same chances rich people have to succeeding, but this does not mean they are guaranteed equal outcome. The current economic system props up the wealthy, who generationally perpetuate wealth to their offspring, and even without giving money to their children, they provide opportunities in the form of legacies, increased connections in business, scholastic funding, and often positions in the businesses they own. Essentially, the wealthiest of Americans have better chances than poor people of going on to become wealthy. The goal of socialism is not to “name your own wage,” but to create a real meritocracy, where positions of security and well-being are earned as opposed to given. Often, this is refuted by saying that it serves as a welfare state; this is not the case, as in order to receive the benefits of the system (outside of infrastructure, which of course is equally shared), you have to work to pay into it. And if you can not work, in order to qualify for welfare you must endure some hardship which puts you beyond working for a living, i.e. old age, ill health, or a permanent disability; things beyond control that do not deserve punishment by society. And as a side note, here, you can’t get a business started with ambition alone; you need capital, and even with a degree, no student debt, a good idea, and a hell of a lot of ambition, raising the kind of capital to start a business can take decades to do yourself, and even with loans, you aren’t liable to make much money off of it for quite some time. And the majority of Americans getting out into the workforce right now? They have debt to pay off, an economy that is running out of jobs (due to technological unemployment and bad fiscal policies; if you want to talk about how technology will eliminate the need for money in the future, I’d be glad to have that talk separately), and a social climate that does not properly reward ambition. So I’m curious about how they are magically expected to make their own businesses, or how that is supposed to be a good solution to the problem of a weak and unstable economic model like the corporatism-capitalism we have now.

        I’m also unclear about your second argument about not having it both ways, because the two ways you mentioned are irrelevant to the argument I made in every single way. I never talked about being your own boss AND working your 9-5, I talked about the advantages of socialism over capitalism, and how the commenters here grossly misunderstand what it really even is (as with all systems, socialism isn’t perfect; it’s downsides are simply fewer than those of capitalism).

        You also mentioned people getting handed “free crap” all the time, and how it doesn’t make you a better/happier person. Your tone here could not be more condescending, especially considering the “crap” you speak of is healthcare (to help keep people from dying needlessly or living in pain), financial security (to ensure they are prosperous), increased economic and government participation (allowing the people to have a real say in government), and an equal chance to succeed (to make a world where merit is truly respected, which is something it seems like you would appreciate). What’s more, being “handed” those things (which you have to pay into anyway), ironically DOES make you a better and happier person. The countries with the highest rate of happiness? All of them are socialist democracies. It’s also funny that you had mentioned an economy where people have the opportunity to run businesses because in Norway, Luxembourg, Canada, Switzerland, and Denmark, the pinnacles of modern socialist democracies, entrepreneurs are rewarded even despite having high taxes, making it the go-to place in most economists’ minds for business start-ups; which one could extrapolate with ease to mean that merit and ambition are more rewarded there, than they are here at home.

        Similarly, your argument is based on the false assumption that having things provided to you will make people work less. When faced with menial labor or repetitive tasks, the reward system of capitalism makes people work more; this is why it remained so dominant in countries with a history in manufacturing. However, numerous studies (which have been proven true through continuous testing without diminishing results) have found that people actually function better on more creative, inventive tasks when provided with lesser rewards, so long as their necessities are cared for. America’s economy has been globalized, moving away from production for years. All the jobs that can be will be automated over time; most menial labor and production jobs already have been, opting for overseas work and robotic substitutes (as in the auto manufacturing plants that are still left. Even grocery stores are losing employees to the implementation of self-check outs and automated stocking/sorting functions. So in an economy which is changing away from industry, where do we go? To invention; to being innovators and leaders in technology, and in automated production of food, goods, and even energy. Socialism inherently supports this model, by supplying the basic necessities to those who can not afford them so that they can utilize their higher cognitive functions more adequately in designing the future goods of the world economy. This is what people talking about “green technology” jobs have been talking about for years, and only now that the unemployment rate soars are people finally catching onto why.

        If you want to know more about this, there’s a great book on it here:

        And it’s pretty easy to find more information on via the power of Google.

        This isn’t making America regressive, this is progressive. We’re trying to prepare our country for the future, and all the hardships intrinsic to that struggle. Being stuck with old fashioned bias and ideology will not, has not (in the last 30 years), and can not help us.

        And on a final note, I realize there are plenty of concerns about how a socialist state could go awry, but the solutions are fairly easy in a truly democratic socialist state. If you have specific concerns I can explain the solutions and cite real-world evidence as much as you would like, and I will openly and willingly concede to you when I do not know something.

  2. What I found interesting:

    “I want my kids to have a job and health care.”

    Businesses can’t create jobs (it’s fallacy to think that governments do) with obscenely high taxes. I’m a small business owner. Best thing the government could do is get out of my way and let me work.

    And if you want your kids to have health care, pay for it. And if they’re adults, they should work and pay for it. Stuff isn’t free.

  3. So who paid for this ad? AdBusters? AlterNet? All these groups are SOROS FUNDED. Why don’t they attack SOROS as one of the 1%???

    There is your answer he is funding them.

  4. Well, Flopsy, Mopsy, and Cottontail, as far as I’m concerned, you can have all the socialism you want: emigrate to a socialist country.

    Then you won’t even have to fight for it. That’s what you’ll have to do to get socialism here.

  5. Did anyone else notice that the production of these videos looks EXACTLY like the “generation we” commercials that came out 1-2 years ago. Google generation we or look on youtube. Five bucks says it’s the same group behind both. Same sort of knuckleheads spewing the same exact drivel. Same clueless stupidity.

  6. Socialism, the want by so many that were unable to make it within a country of freedom to make it on their own. Socialism, wanted by elites with a consious that they make way too much, more then they deserve, they now push hard to distribute others incomes among the populous that were not able to make it in the free world.. So you super rich, elites, Hollyweirds and all the rest with mega bank accts that are die hard socialist, communist, hell bent on sharing everyones monies and your money, pushing this agenda, I ask, are you willing to start over ? Willing to clean the slate ? Clean out your bank accts of every last dollar you have, all your prestine real estate you have around the globe ? The millions in investments you hold ? Throw it all away, or donate it to the greater good of SOCIALISM, the sharing of everything, for the equality between all man, woman and child.. This would be the honorable thing to do, a clean start for every one, every person would start at zero dollars, zero assets and we all would live off the govt, giving all we earn to them and in return we would receive total care and our equal pay checks. Therefore no one would be wealthier, nor above any other… Now that is what i call selflessness, So what do all you wealthy socialist wanna Bs have to say ??????? Lets rock and roll then…..

    1. They will argue that socialism cannot work so long as there are countries which its victims can flee to. So they must bring the whole world down.

  7. IBEW-last tele-commie speaker- this union is a communist front org. They sponsor everything detestable to America

  8. TRS, I didn’t see any of them actually advocate socialism in that clip. I mean, if any of them said “I want socialism” or “I want the government to nationalise the (insert industry)”, then I’d agree with labelling it socialism.

    From what I could see:

    The 4th and 5th speakers were advocating Marxism
    The 7th speaker was advocating Fascism
    The 8th speaker was advocating Communism

  9. So get off your asses and work for it.

    You want a voice in politics, run for office.

    You want corporations out of politics, then find out who it is you’re voting for. Barney Frank, Chris Dodd and Charlie Rangel (among others) have been re-elected for years and they are probably among the most corrupt politicians ever.

    You want peace, lady it only comes through strength and that means a strong military.

    You want extra taxes from the wealthy to go to education – Americans everywhere are paying a huge tax burden for bad teachers who can’t be fired. Get the unions OUT of education.

    You want “economic justice”, a great wish but redistributing all the wealth in the country isn’t going to pull some people out of poverty. Some people love dependency and being the victim. You can’t fix stupid with money.

    You want a greater regulation of banks and the markets – GET THE GOVERNMENT OUT OF THE MARKETS. Capitalism and Free Enterprise can and do regulate the markets when the government isn’t involved picking winners and losers.

    You want your kids to have a job and healthcare? Tell them to get a good education in something that’s useful (which doesn’t mean a masters in Philosophy.) There is nothing wrong with being a plumber or a tailor or an auto body repairman/woman.

    You want “true democracy”? Fella you don’t know how a “true democracy” operates. Ever heard of mob rule?

    1. Couldn’t have said it better myself.

      I don’t understand how all these people can’t see that it’s politicians that put these polices in place that they hate, that bailed out the banks, that favor certain corporations over other.

      Again, you want change?? Go to D.C. and protest what your congressman is doing, what your senators are doing and what this current administration is doing.

      I don’t want to hear “Oh but Bush got us to where we are now.” Well, maybe he did, maybe he didn’t. But he couldn’t have done it without the democratic controlled congress. And the truth of the matter is BUSH ISN’T PRESIDENT ANYMORE!! Its in the past, move on and try and figure out how to fix the system instead of blaming him for all the failures. Blaming corporations for trying to make money isn’t the answer.

      And what is “economic justice” anyways? Can someone define that for me please??

  10. I want the last guy (IBEW Boston) to get an education. We don’t have a democracy, you jackhole. This is a representative republic. Learn the difference.

    To the kid that wants “his voice to heard without jeopardizing his job”……you probably don’t have a job to start. You do have the freedom of speech. Unfortunately for you, you also have the freedom to be an idiot. We can’t stop you from that.

    1. Your freedom to speak up about issues includes your employers freedom to fire you for reasons he sees fit.

      Maybe you don’t present the image that the corporation is looking for, guess what? Fired or not hired. Its their business, they are going to run it the best way they see and having someone with a bunch of shit in their face may not be the best image that they want when they are trying to encourage investors and what not.

      Your freedom to be you includes my freedom to be free from you.

    1. I like the first one Dan- posted it a couple of months ago on my facebook, and I showed it to my son 🙂
      Love the second one, hadn’t seen it yet, so I just posted it now to facebook! Thanks~

  11. i would like to see you people move to North Korea so you can see what you want to set up here…and once there please don’t ask to come back “K”

  12. as TRS says…scripted, perhaps the new DNC ad?? yep, I shudder…beware the wolves in ‘sheeps’ clothing. this ain’t your mama’s republic, it’s ‘what do I want?? give it to me NOW!’…I’m concerned, but prepared. Expect it’ll get worse, before better…my son asked ‘why is this so important?’…we read history together…he understands the risk, yet he doesn’t wanna believe it can happen again. it can.

  13. I want a million bucks, to catch the biggest bass in history and cure cancer. My mom, God rest her young soul, used to say, ” wish in one hand, shit in the other, and see which one fills up faster.” God she gave such good advice!

  14. This ad looks like an attempt by the marxist propaganda machine to counter the videos+pictures about dirty stinky clueless dimwits camping out on Wall Street for free food, drugs and sex. I wouldn’t be surprised if those featured are actors forced by their unions to record this ad for free.

  15. I want corporations LIKE GE, GOOGLE , FACEBOOK AND BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY to get out of government and pay their back taxes

  16. I just met, today, a young woman who grew up in Poland. She has a PhD and is an organic chemist doing research at Vanderbilt University in Nashville. Ask her to about socialism or communism. Needless to say, she hopes to be able to stay here.

    1. Or as my friend’s parents , who escaped from Cuba say :
      ” If you like Cuba so much, what are you doing here ?”

    2. I am a first generation American who grew up with stories from my father of Hilter’s’ invasion of his homeland. There were no shots fired, the mayors and town councils stood with open arms. He told me of socialism and how it crept into the universities and the churches and the shipyards. How the newspapers told only of the compassion, humanity and strength of national socialism.

      It did not have much context for me then. I certainly never imagined it would come to America. His words flash before me now each day I read the news.

      We democrats, republicans and libertarians, have a chance, a narrow one, to avoid going down in history as the generation who lost America.

    3. My daughter worked with a chemist and researcher at a large pharmaceutical company whose family escaped the fall of South Vietnam and become French citizens. He worked here for 10 years legally and was the exemplary, hardest and most dedicated worker there.

      I met him. He loved America and understood the Constitution and why it was so critical. He also knew socialism from France and Communism from his parents stories. After 10 years he was denied a green card and any chance of citizenship. He had to return to France.

      A few weeks ago I found out that a waiter at a restaurant we used to frequent had been given US citizenship. We had quit going there as this man mad sure we knew that islam must cleanse the West.

      Our government’s choice in citizenship for those two men is by design.

      1. I could add a few more stories such as that, which I see fairly often down here. It’s sad that hard working people who come and contribute so much to America are getting shipped out to make way for…. ah crap I hate this so much.

    4. My family legally emigrated to America from a Communist country and have the deepest respect and appreciation for America. Anyone that has lived under Communism or oppression doesn’t want it… the “useful idiot” protesters don’t have a clue what they are asking for…their own slavery.

      1. You are so right; the useful idiots are so stupid that they don’t realize that the only reason they can be out on the streets acting like useful idiots is because they live in a free country.

        My mom grew up in a socialist country and she was so proud of this country; she loved the red, white, and blue…a great patriot.

    5. Suggest that she do an exchange student program with one of these foolface OWS humanoids. A no-lose proposition. Either the humanoid would LUUUUV socialism and stay in Poland (and maybe pigs will fly) or one humanoid would be cured, and meanwhile we can try to explain to State or whoever that the Polish organic chemist is worth an infinite number of America-hating humanoids.

    1. More relevent to the fact, most would invite you in and force you to stay there as in the former Soviet Block, Cuba, Venezuela soon to be Brazil.

      Terrible to be that f-ing stupid. The university system needs a complete tear down to be rebuilt. If my son or daughter came home from these cesspools of indoctrination with this mindset, the faculty would die at my hands.

      Sick of this shit!

Comments are closed.