My Trip To Occupy Wall Street

[Jay NotApplicable]

-http://www.jlakoda.com/my-trip-to-occupy-wall-street/-

I am a Christian anarchist, and I have strong feelings about capitalism and authority. So when the Occupy Wall Street protest began in September, 2011 I saw it as my generation’s Woodstock. It offered like minded people the chance to gather together by the thousands and voice our opposition to what was happening in the world. I started protesting at Occupy Northampton, in Massachusetts, and after a few weeks I decided to join the camp at Wall Street.

I traveled to Zuccotti Park, in New York, by car. I parked at a nearby parking garage so that I could unload my belongings and set up camp. There was very little room anywhere in the park to set up a tent since so many other people already had tents set up. There were hundreds of tents filling almost every open space in the park, so it took some time before I found a spot for myself. I set my tent up and put all my belongings in it, and then went back to my car. I couldn’t leave the car where it was because I couldn’t afford the cost of parking. So I drove to the Vince Lombardi rest stop in New Jersey, which was only twelve miles away from the park. I was able to park my car there for free. I then took a taxi back to Zuccotti Park.

I was only at Occupy Wall Street for about a week, but a lot happened during that week. I had a big cardboard sign that I hung by a string around my neck. The sign said “Tax The Rich” in big block letters. I stood by the street for hours every day. There were not a lot of other people standing with signs like I had expected there to be. I was one of the few who were protesting in that way. Simply living at the park near Wall Street was the method of protest for most of the occupants. While standing near the street, people would often walk up to me and thank me for doing what they didn’t have the time to do, and for representing them. Hundreds of tourists and passers-by took my picture. Many of them stood next to me while somebody else took a picture of us. I felt like I was a tourist attraction, and in fact I was part of a tourist attraction. Tour busses full of sightseers would drive by, and the tour guides would make announcements about the Occupy Wall Street protesters as they passed by.

I had brought my laptop and a car battery with a power inverter to keep my laptop charged. So I was able to get onto the internet every day. I kept my friends and family updated on what was happening through Facebook. At night I even played Runescape, which is a multiplayer online role playing game that I enjoy. There was a food tent set up and three meals a day were provided to us for free by volunteers. I had a good sleeping bag to keep me warm, and a flashlight hanging from top of the tent to light my space at night. While I was there I had a great time interacting with people, discussing my views on politics.

Finally one night, at about midnight, the cops began raiding our encampment. Someone ran around yelling that the cops were raiding us, so I got as much of my belongings as I could fit in my backpack, and got ready to leave. I couldn’t carry my tent and all my other stuff, so I had to just abandon it.

The kitchen staff chained their necks to trees in protest to the cops raiding the park. I took off down the street with thousands of other protesters, trying not to get arrested or pepper sprayed. The cops went through the whole place cutting open everyone’s tents with razor blades. They pepper sprayed and arrested anyone who refused to leave.

The police then started herding us through the streets for hours. Anyone who got too tired to keep moving was pepper sprayed and arrested. I was getting tired, so I was near the back of the crowd. I was near a woman who couldn’t keep up. She got pepper sprayed, and some of the pepper spray went in my eyes.

After hours of walking through the streets of New York the cops temporarily stopped coming after us. There were thousands of us there at the time. We stopped moving when we were near a big empty piece of property that turned out to be owned by a church. We stayed awake all night and into the next morning. Then early in the day someone cut the fence open with bolt cutters and some of us went onto the church property, hoping the church would protect us from the police. We were hoping that plot of land would be a safe haven for us to continue our protest, now that we were not allowed to Occupy the park anymore. The church elders had an emergency meeting to decide what to do about the situation. After a few hours they came to a conclusion. They told the cops to arrest us for trespassing. It wasn’t until months later that I found out that many of the wealthy Wall Street bankers went to that church, which I’m sure influenced their decision not to help us.

So the cops told us if we didn’t leave we would be arrested for trespassing. Most of us left the property, but some stayed behind in protest. The cops arrested them, including one woman in a wheel chair. The rest of us then found out that the court ordered the police to allow us back into Zuccotti Park. So we walked for a couple hours back to the park. But when we got there the cops had the place surrounded. The cops were going against what the judge ruled, and were not allowing us back into the park. Many hours passed as we waited for the court to do something about the situation.

I became tired from having not slept the night before, so I unrolled my sleeping bag and took a nap on the sidewalk. Then somebody woke me up and told me to get up quickly. He told me a woman complained to the cops that I was sleeping on the sidewalk, so a cop was about to wake me up with pepper spray to my face. The cop had his can of pepper spray in hand, but I got out of my sleeping bag quickly enough not to get sprayed.

Eventually the court made another demand that the cops let us back into the park, but with strings attached. Nobody was allowed to bring sleeping bags, tents or other sleeping paraphernalia into the park. The entire park, which the day before was completely covered with tents, was now completely clean and empty. The cops had city workers dump all of our tents and belongings into garbage trucks to be hauled away. We lost all of our belongings. Some friends that I made while there said they lost several laptops and bicycles. Many hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of perfectly good items were disposed of.

To get back into the park we had to go through a check point so that the cops could search us and our bags to make sure we didn’t bring in any sleeping paraphernalia. I wasn’t about to ditch my expensive sleeping bag, so I found a spot that was away from the new entrance. I handed my sleeping bag to someone on the other side, and I then crawled under the fence. I had successfully smuggled a sleeping bag into the park.

When it was closer to evening someone asked me if I had a place to stay that night. I told him no, so he told me to go with a small group of people. There were some people who lived nearby that were allowing small groups of us to stay the night in their apartments. I went along with our group of six, and took the bus to the Bronx. There an old Spanish woman allowed us to sleep in her apartment. She fed us dinner, and let us shower. The next morning she fed us breakfast. I was a vegetarian at the time, and she had put ham in the eggs. But I ate it anyway, not wanting to insult her. I was very thankful, and I told her I greatly appreciated what she was doing for us. It was that morning that I decided to go back home since I didn’t have a tent anymore, and no permanent place to stay. So I took the subway and then a bus back to my car, and drove home to Massachusetts. I was exhausted and happy to be back home with my family after such an eventful week.

[Loony Le Fist]

Your story stands in contrast to what the mainstream media said. This of course goes without saying. Most of the people that showed up to Zuccotti Park tell me a completely different story then what the mainstream press put out, very similar to yours. A story of brutal oppression.

The thing I never understand is why the police chase down the protesters. The protesters take off running, and they waste police resources running after them. It makes sense, from a bourgeois perspective, arresting those that decide to stay and refuse to leave. But the fact that they chased you down says something. It shows the intent is to send a message. To create a chilling effect so that future protests don't take place. It is truly a bully tactic.

Just to clarify I don't think the OWS protesters at Zuccotti should have been forced to leave. It shouldn't have even required a judge's order. It just goes to show how little anyone cares the rights of common people to protest in the US--or anywhere for that matter. But knowing that even with the judges order, the police continued their assault--that truly makes me angry. :mad:

I'm curious. Were there any people that acted negatively towards you? I'm curious to know if there were, and how they reacted.

Thanks for sharing. It's an incredible experience you had, and it really demonstrates what is truly going on out there.

[Creative Destruction]

Well, in a way, it's a perfect and elementary example for showing the force of capitalism when people try to take over private property and in some way socialize it, even for a brief period of time. It shows the tension between a legal system that ultimately sides in favor of capital (because they have to, in order to remain true to bourgeois legal concepts that make up the structure of this system) and private property owners, and the people who want to rid the world of such a concept.

[Bala Perdida]

Damn. This is the first time I hear about the protest from a protesters perspective.
Back then I was not that into politics, but my views where more along Mexican nationalism, and I thought the protest where just a bunch of mindless hippies. I did get my information from the news, so that didn't help my view of it.
Hearing about the excess police force and brutality was really awakening. I had no idea just how oppressive the government of the country I live in could get. Just comes to show what'll happen when you stand up for the rights of the oppressed, just look at the civil rights movement. MLK was killed while protesting the treatment of poor people in the country, and the movement, similar to the tent camping of OWS, was also violently torn down. I've never heard of this happening at tea party protest. All the american culture, nationalism, anti-socialism, support from republicans and libertarians, and their call for a more privatized regime with less "government intervention" is pretty nonthreatening to the power structure. Even with the liberals calling them "right-wing extremists", the movement still seems almost welcome in comparison to the OWS.
Since my views changed I started to miss the movement, but the struggle carries on and that's just as important.

[Jay NotApplicable]

I'm curious. Were there any people that acted negatively towards you? I'm curious to know if there were, and how they reacted.

There were many people who reacted negatively towards us. Some people would drive by in cars and give the middle finger. Some people would pass by and yell at us. One man told me I better not take his money.

There were also neutral people, mostly media. Some interviewed me, but they took no stance on issues.

[Ares1214]

There were many people who reacted negatively towards us. Some people would drive by in cars and give the middle finger. Some people would pass by and yell at us. One man told me I better not take his money.

There were also neutral people, mostly media. Some interviewed me, but they took no stance on issues.

Well I mean communism would involve taking that guys private property so I'm not terribly surprised he wasn't fond of you, he can't really be blamed for wanting to keep what is his.

[The Jay]

Well I mean communism would involve taking that guys private property so I'm not terribly surprised he wasn't fond of you, he can't really be blamed for wanting to keep what is his.

It depends on what is 'his' now wouldn't it? I guarantee that nobody will try to take his blender.

[tachosomoza]

We need a motto like: "Expropriate factories and banks, not blenders and septic tanks."

[Ares1214]

It depends on what is 'his' now wouldn't it? I guarantee that nobody will try to take his blender.

What if he is self-employed and owns his own business?

[The Jay]

What if he is self-employed and owns his own business?

It really depends on what the specifics are. For example, if he were to be a chemical checker for swimming pools for his trade then not much would change to be honest. If, on the other hand, he were to refuse to check any pools and tried to stop anyone from using the equipment then there would probably be some conflict. On a third hand, he could just abandon his equipment to pursue something else.

[tachosomoza]

What if he is self-employed and owns his own business?

Then he's petty bourgeois and his capital will be expropriated. No private ownership of capital.

[Ares1214]

Then he's petty bourgeois and his capital will be expropriated. No private ownership of capital.

Once again, are you surprised that he wouldn't exactly be fond of someone who wanted that? What you wan't directly hurts him, he was totally justified in flipping people off who want that.

[tachosomoza]

Once again, are you surprised that he wouldn't exactly be fond of someone who wanted that? What you wan't directly hurts him, he was totally justified in flipping people off who want that.

Of course I'm not surprised, it'd go against his class interest. Communists don't fight for the petty bourgeoisie, our job is not to organize and promote the interests of the petty bourgeoisie, our job is to organize and promote and fight for the interests of the proletariat.

[Rurkel]

Communists would be the first to claim that their goals are indeed objectively in conflict with the interests of certain people and classes. However, the petty-bourgeoisie interests are usually also in conflict with the interests of bourgeoisie proper nowadays. This might give some members of this class a reason to support communists, though it can also give them a reason to engage in various pseudo-"anticapitalist" stuff.

[Ares1214]

Of course I'm not surprised, it'd go against his class interest. Communists don't fight for the petty bourgeoisie, our job is not to organize and promote the interests of the petty bourgeoisie, our job is to organize and promote and fight for the interests of the proletariat.

What makes a man who owns his own business and say, sells things on Amazon or EBay so evil? Let's say he makes his own fishing lures, or maybe his own furniture, or whatever, how is he hurting anyone? How is he oppressing the proletariat?

[Creative Destruction]

Once again, are you surprised that he wouldn't exactly be fond of someone who wanted that? What you wan't directly hurts him, he was totally justified in flipping people off who want that.

The petit bourgeois would often be better off in a socialized society than they would in a capitalist society, where in capitalism they're often required to go into deep amounts of debt, work long (sometimes ungodly long) hours, just to get some meager returns at the end of it all. Meanwhile, the way technology develops and is used by larger companies pretty much puts the squeeze on small businesses.

Still, they are a hardheaded class -- one or two that even succeed in building one of the big businesses that eventually squeezes out smaller ones -- and they look out for their own interests. That's why they were a favorite base for fascist recruitment.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

Who is bringing good and evil into this? His shit would be expropriated because the system supporting that kind of operation is coming to an end, not because he's evil.

[Creative Destruction]

What makes a man who owns his own business and say, sells things on Amazon or EBay so evil? Let's say he makes his own fishing lures, or maybe his own furniture, or whatever, how is he hurting anyone? How is he oppressing the proletariat?

No one is talking about "good" or "evil". This is a false dichotomy that capitalist apologists like to project a lot, I've noticed.

Sometimes people are forced to open their own business in order to just get by and would have preferred not to have gone through the hassle to begin with. That certainly doesn't make them evil, and I doubt many business people go to open a business thinking about how they can exploit people, but that doesn't change the fact that there are exploitative dynamics at work between people who own capital and those who only own their labor. That's the exploitation: profiting off of people's labor.

[Ares1214]

The petit bourgeois would often be better off in a socialized society than they would in a capitalist society, where in capitalism they're often required to go into deep amounts of debt, work long (sometimes ungodly long) hours, just to get some meager returns at the end of it all. Meanwhile, the way technology develops and is used by larger companies pretty much puts the squeeze on small businesses.

Still, they are a few hardheaded class -- one or two that even succeed in building one of the big businesses that eventually squeezes out smaller ones -- and they look out for their own interests. That's why they were a favorite base for fascist recruitment.

Why would a petit bourgeois be better off in a socialized society? You can't just make an empty claim like that without support.


Who is bringing good and evil into this? His shit would be expropriated because the system supporting that kind of operation is coming to an end, not because he's evil.

Communists bring good and evil into this, saying how abusive the petit bourgeois and how they crush the rights of the proletariat. So I am asking, why does this guy that I specifically mentioned prior crush the rights of the proletariat? Why should his shit get taken away to make his life worse and other's better?

[Ares1214]

No one is talking about "good" or "evil". This is a false dichotomy that capitalist apologists like to project a lot, I've noticed.

Sometimes people are forced to open their own business in order to just get by and would have preferred not to have gone through the hassle to begin with. That certainly doesn't make them evil, and I doubt many business people go to open a business thinking about how they can exploit people, but that doesn't change the fact that there are exploitative dynamics at work between people who own capital and those who only own their labor. That's the exploitation: profiting off of people's labor.

This guy doesn't employ labor, he makes his own things from scratch. How are laborers exploited anyway, because there is profit?

[Creative Destruction]

Well I mean communism would involve taking that guys private property so I'm not terribly surprised he wasn't fond of you, he can't really be blamed for wanting to keep what is his.

Taking the guy's money isn't taking over private property.

[Ares1214]

Taking the guy's money isn't taking over private property.


Tangible and intangible things owned by individuals or firms over which their owners have exclusive and absolute legal rights, such as land, buildings, money, copyrights, patents, etc. Private property can be transferred only with its owner's consent, and by due process such as sale or gift.


Dictionaries seem to disagree.

[tachosomoza]

What makes a man who owns his own business and say, sells things on Amazon or EBay so evil? Let's say he makes his own fishing lures, or maybe his own furniture, or whatever, how is he hurting anyone? How is he oppressing the proletariat?

It's not a question of good or evil, it's a question of relation to capital. If you own capital privately, it's getting expropriated. If you're hostile to the interests of the revolutionary proletariat or stand in the way as many of these petty bourgeois small businesspeople are wont to do out of fear, you'll be swept away. There will be no allowance for a fifth column of petty bourgeoisie to rip out the heart of the revolution and organize in a counter revolutionary fashion.

[Creative Destruction]

Why would a petit bourgeois be better off in a socialized society? You can't just make an empty claim like that without support.

I thought it was self-evident why someone's status would be better in a society where they have security, access to all of life's needs and opportunity to do work that is fulfilling to them, without the distinct possibility of crushing economic circumstances, in contrast to a system that all but ensures most people's near-total economic failure within the first year of existence.


Communists bring good and evil into this, saying how abusive the petit bourgeois and how they crush the rights of the proletariat. So I am asking, why does this guy that I specifically mentioned prior crush the rights of the proletariat? Why should his shit get taken away to make his life worse and other's better?

This is a strawman. No one has said this -- not in this thread, anyway, and i'm not aware of anyone who makes the argument that this is necessarily true. I'm not inclined to answer your question if you can't structure an argument against what people actually say.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

Why would a petit bourgeois be better off in a socialized society? You can't just make an empty claim like that without support.



Communists bring good and evil into this, saying how abusive the petit bourgeois and how they crush the rights of the proletariat. So I am asking, why does this guy that I specifically mentioned prior crush the rights of the proletariat? Why should his shit get taken away to make his life worse and other's better?

The system he participates in is the issue. He might be nice to his employees or he might be a total asshole, it doesn't matter. The whole system has to go, its not like an exception can be made for one person who might be really nice. "ok capitalism can remain in this shop, you seem like a real decent guy and all." When capitalism goes, all of its going to go. I'm sure some slave masters were pretty nice, should they have been allowed to keep their slaves after the rest were emancipated? How would that have even played out?

[Creative Destruction]

Dictionaries seem to disagree.

This is often a point of confusion for people who are just learning about socialist economics. There is almost always a distinction drawn between personal property and private property. Private property is almost always used to denote the means of production. Money can certainly be included in this in some circumstances (as is the case with the financial industry) but it is not the case in which was being referenced, afaict. Communists don't want to run up on some old dude and take the cash in his pocket because... communism, or whatever.

[Ares1214]

I thought it was self-evident why someone's status would be better in a society where they have security, access to all of life's needs and opportunity to do work that is fulfilling to them, without the distinct possibility of crushing economic circumstances, in contrast to a system that all but ensures most people's near-total economic failure within the first year of existence.

You basically did nothing more than shower praise on communism to explain why communism is better. There was zero substance in that post. Just rhetoric.


The system he participates in is the issue. He might be nice to his employees or he might be a total asshole, it doesn't matter. The whole system has to go, its not like an exception can be made for one person who might be really nice. "ok capitalism can remain in this shop, you seem like a real decent guy and all." When capitalism goes, all of its going to go. I'm sure some slave masters were pretty nice, should they have been allowed to keep their slaves after the rest were emancipated? How would that have even played out?

Except no matter how nice a slave owner you were, you were still violating the human rights of others. What human rights would the self employed, small business man be violating?

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

You basically did nothing more than shower praise on communism to explain why communism is better. There was zero substance in that post. Just rhetoric.



Except no matter how nice a slave owner you were, you were still violating the human rights of others. What human rights would the self employed, small business man be violating?

What are human rights? Who grants them? Who enforces them?

[Creative Destruction]

This guy doesn't employ labor, he makes his own things from scratch. How are laborers exploited anyway, because there is profit?

Well, in this case laborers aren't being exploited (though he is still part of the petit bourgeois because of his relationship to capital as an owner of it.) As an artisan, he probably doesn't make that much, especially going at it alone, and he probably works pretty hard. Nonetheless, these sorts of folks aren't usually who we're referring to when we talk about general economic circumstances, because this is a relatively rare example.

Which just goes to show that you should probably learn a thing or two about what you're ostensibly against, before you try and argue against it.

[Creative Destruction]

You basically did nothing more than shower praise on communism to explain why communism is better. There was zero substance in that post. Just rhetoric.

This is pretty ironic considering your posts so far in this thread!

In fact, what I was doing was comparing a different vision for society in contrast to what we actually have now. I'd be happy to pull up the statistics on how hard it is to start, run and maintain a profitable small business, and how the vast majority of them close shop within the first 5 years of operation... but I thought that was common knowledge.


Except no matter how nice a slave owner you were, you were still violating the human rights of others. What human rights would the self employed, small business man be violating?

I never said he was violating "human rights" (which is an extremely amorphous concept, btw.) Are you going to keep batting at strawmen or do you actually want to know what it is you're trying to argue against here?

[Ares1214]

What are human rights? Who grants them? Who enforces them?

I saw a semantic argument coming in from a mile away. :lol:
I would say being enslaved against your will is violating a humans right. Do employers enslave their employee's against their will?


Well, in this case laborers aren't being exploited (though he is still part of the petit bourgeois because of his relationship to capital as an owner of it.) As an artisan, he probably doesn't make that much, especially going at it alone, and he probably works pretty hard. Nonetheless, these sorts of folks aren't usually who we're referring to when we talk about general economic circumstances, because this is a relatively rare example.

Which just goes to show that you should probably learn a thing or two about what you're ostensibly against, before you try and argue against it.

You keep dodging my requests for substantive points and evidence, and now make some personal attacks? Saying everyone gets everything they ever wanted and can do as they please in communism proves that you don't even know what you are talking about.

[Ares1214]

This is pretty ironic considering your posts so far in this thread!

In fact, what I was doing was comparing a different vision for society in contrast to what we actually have now. I'd be happy to pull up the statistics on how hard it is to start, run and maintain a profitable small business, and how the vast majority of them close shop within the first 5 years of operation... but I thought that was common knowledge.

I'm a small business owner, I'm quite content with my life, so the picture you painted is simply an unfounded and dramatized generalization.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

I saw a semantic argument coming in from a mile away. :lol:
I would say being enslaved against your will is violating a humans right. Do employers enslave their employee's against their will?

Rights don't enter into the equation, because as you've demonstrated, they are inherently malleable. Conceptions of "human rights" differ from person to person, culture to culture and from different eras. The slave owner wasn't violating anyone's rights until the legal system said he was. I brought up slaves not because of rights, but because of the systemic similarities. How could one slave owner be allowed to keep "his property" if everyone else has had theirs removed from the property category all together? It's not possible to do, the same would go for the hypothetical "nice" capitalist. His personal qualities do not matter, his relation to private property does. He's getting expropriated because he owns private property and no one is allowed to do that anymore, not because he is mean or evil.

[Ares1214]

Rights don't enter into the equation, because as you've demonstrated, they are inherently malleable. Conceptions of "human rights" differ from person to person, culture to culture and from different eras. The slave owner wasn't violating anyone's rights until the legal system said he was. I brought up slaves not because of rights, but because of the systemic similarities. How could one slave owner be allowed to keep "his property" if everyone else has had theirs removed from the property category all together? It's not possible to do, the same would go for the hypothetical "nice" capitalist. His personal qualities do not matter, his relation to private property does. He's getting expropriated because he owns private property and no one is allowed to do that anymore, not because he is mean or evil.

While this is much more substantive than other posts, it doesn't change the fact that his quality of life would be significantly decreased by the state. I simply don't understand why profit is so frowned upon by communists, but I'd love to hear a good explanation.

[Creative Destruction]

I'm a small business owner, I'm quite content with my life, so the picture you painted is simply an unfounded and dramatized generalization.

No, it's not, actually. It's the story of a ton of people who became part of that statistic. I've been a firsthand witness to it, as well. So, fuck you, I guess.

[Creative Destruction]

While this is much more substantive than other posts, it doesn't change the fact that his quality of life would be significantly decreased by the state. I simply don't understand why profit is so frowned upon by communists, but I'd love to hear a good explanation.

Here you go:

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/

[Ares1214]

No, it's not, actually. It's the story of a ton of people who became part of that statistic. I've been a firsthand witness to it, as well. So, fuck you, I guess.

Personal attacks and unsupported statements, what's new. :rolleyes:

And no, I wanted you to explain it, why is profit so bad?

[Creative Destruction]

Personal attacks and unsupported statements, what's new. :rolleyes:

What do you want support for? The fact that most businesses fail within the first five years?


And no, I wanted you to explain it, why is profit so bad?

You asked for a good explanation. I linked you to one that is incredibly in-depth. No need to go reinventing the wheel, especially since you're not particularly serious about this conversation.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

While this is much more substantive than other posts, it doesn't change the fact that his quality of life would be significantly decreased by the state. I simply don't understand why profit is so frowned upon by communists, but I'd love to hear a good explanation.

I would suggest reading the link rednoise gave gave you and you can also check out the law of value video series over at http://kapitalism101.wordpress.com/ Its on the right side of the page.

Edit: actually nevermind about rednoise's link, since most Marxists are too lazy to even read it, I'll assume that the reactionary small businessmen is not really willing to invest several weeks into Capital volume 1. Try this instead: http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/wage-labour/index.htm it's much more consise and can be digested in an afternoon.

Anyhow, you keep bringing this up in such a way as if it suggest that the desire for communism only arises as a moral response to the creation of profit and this just isn't the case. A different justification that does not rest of morality would be something as simple as the management of society. Take a look at the world around us, have the capitalists done a good job with resource management? How about infrastructure management? Unless you live under a rock you can see that huge portions of humanity are at best underserved if not forgotten all together. Scarce resources are wasted on the production of useless shit that is intended to be thrown away after 2 or 3 years. Educated minds are monopolized for market research for ad campains while medical research suffers. Engineers build new and innovative cell phones while most of the planet's infrastructure crumbles or poisons the environment. Crisis after crisis after crisis, these hacks can't manage shit and yet they're allowed to run our whole fucking planet. That power should be taken away from them and it rests on private property. So it's bedtime for private property. No good no evil, just survival.

[Ares1214]

I would suggest reading the link rednoise gave gave you and you can also check out the law of value video series over at http://kapitalism101.wordpress.com/ Its on the right side of the page.

Edit: actually nevermind about rednoise's link, since most Marxists are too lazy to even read it, I'll assume that the reactionary small businessmen is not really willing to invest several weeks into Capital volume 1. Try this instead: http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/wage-labour/index.htm it's much more consise and can be digested in an afternoon.

Anyhow, you keep bringing this up in such a way as if it suggest that the desire for communism only arises as a moral response to the creation of profit and this just isn't the case. A different justification that does not rest of morality would be something as simple as the management of society. Take a look at the world around us, have the capitalists done a good job with resource management? How about infrastructure management? Unless you live under a rock you can see that huge portions of humanity are at best underserved if not forgotten all together. Scarce resources are wasted on the production of useless shit that is intended to be thrown away after 2 or 3 years. Educated minds are monopolized for market research for ad campains while medical research suffers. Engineers build new and innovative cell phones while most of the planet's infrastructure crumbles or poisons the environment. Crisis after crisis after crisis, these hacks can't manage shit and yet they're allowed to run our whole fucking planet. That power should be taken away from them and it rests on private property. So it's bedtime for private property. No good no evil, just survival.

Thank you for being understanding that I don't exactly have a month or two to read all of Capital, not that I'm unfamiliar with it, I've actually read quite a few excerpts and summaries. I'm also not a reactionary by the way, at least not how most people define reactionary.

To your post, yes that's all true, but how would a global communist society do any better? If it's not global, it simply wouldn't work, if it is global, the level of management required would be obscene. For example, the US government spends $60,000 in welfare spending per household below the poverty line each year. Has their situation really improved much? How would a centralized, global governing body do better than the current governments we have now? How would it lead to a dictatorship of the proletariat when it would require authoritarian rule just to have a command economy of that size?

[NGNM85]

For example, the US government spends $60,000 in welfare spending per household below the poverty line each year.

As this article fron the Washington Post;

http://m.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/a-misleading-chart-on-welfare-spending/2013/02/20/1b40bcde-7ba4-11e2-82e8-61a46c2cde3d_blog.html

demonstrates, this figure is factually incorrect.