Monday, October 24, 2011

Occupy Wall Street in one picture

60% of Americans own less than 5% of America. I.e., they're flat broke, lacking the fundamental capital to do anything at all to improve their economic position.

Meanwhile, 5% of Americans own 59.4% of America. The top 5%, and especially the top 1%, have set up an anti-capitalist system where they are the rulers, and the bottom 60% are their serfs. This isn't capitalism. This is neo-feudalism. This is a return to the economic system of the Dark Ages, where the lords of the manor owned everything and you depended upon them for your very existence.

This is not sustainable in a democracy. It isn't. OWS is just a canary in the coal mine here. The amount of pressure building down below is enormous and when it blows... nothing good will happen, guaranteed. Nothing good. Which is why it is in the interests of the top 5% to restore capitalism to the global economy and make sure that the bottom 60% have access to the capital needed to make something of themselves, whether that be via education, access to grants and loans for small business incubation, whatever. Otherwise... uhm. I'm in that top 20% that owns 83.4% of everything, and I tell you, I *like* my neck and would prefer to have it continue keeping my head attached to my body. I am astounded that the top 1% think that the laws of physics don't apply anymore, that they can let pressure build up below and nothing bad is going to happen. Because that's insane. That's literally insane. And self-destructive, in the end, because the oligarchs are going to end up getting their cold-blooded lizard hearts ripped out and thrown onto the streets if this keeps on like it is, but our lizard overlords appear to be DUMB as well as greedy...

-- Badtux the Capitalist Penguin


  1. This is why a lot of rich little kids on my Christmas list are going to be getting this for Christmas this year. I think it is good for them to be aware of what happens to people who ignore the needs of 99% ;)

  2. Since the 1% in all likelihood have the military on their side, why should they change? When the fecal matter hits the whirling blades, they will just use force. It worked for the Chinese after all.

  3. MCV, Mubarak thought he had the military on his side too. The reality is that the military is a wild card. There is no telling what would happen if they were ordered to fire upon "looters and rioters" who clearly weren't. They might do it. They might decide that a government giving such an order is illegitimate and overthrow it. Or they might simply refuse to follow the order. I don't think we want to know.

    In China using the military against the Tienanmen Square protesters worked because those protesters were a small segment of society with little popular support and the Chinese dictatorship was able to maintain an information blackout. Even without military intervention those protests would have gone nowhere. The majority of the Chinese people are really like people anywhere, as long as they see their lives improving -- which is happening with their current government compared to the past -- they're happy and really don't care what form of government they live under.

    Lynne, what a *great* gift idea!

    - Badtux the 99% Penguin

  4. One of the OWS signs I saw recently said, "Soon All the Poor Will Have to Eat are The Rich."

    Yeah, but they'll eat a lot of each other before the Rich face the knives and forks.

  5. Nothing gets fixed until the guns come out. And I think that the Movement folks should just get over tent cities, they are so lame.

  6. If I was the president I would not turn the military or police against the people trying to take their country back. I would encourage them to get the job done and invite them into the white house for root beer floats when they got there.

  7. Yeah. Let them eat cake. Let them drink root beer. Whatever.

  8. BadTux, re Tiananmen - even at that the troops used to crush the demonstration were not from the Beijing garrison: they had been brought in from an outlying military district because there had already been too much fraternization between the local troops and police and the demonstrators, to the point that their commanders weren't sure if they would follow every order given.

    I don't know if the point will be reached where an order to fire on an unarmed, peaceful assembly will be given, that is in the obvious absence of any provoked mayhem. As you say, I don't think we want to know what will happen.

  9. The thing is that the police and the military are beginning to realize that they too are part of the 99% and are getting crapped on. We saw what happened in Albany and even the mayor of Oakland sent a mixed message. No me thinks the majority in this country are about fed up with congressional do nothings. What's congress' approval rating like 9%?


Ground rules: Comments that consist solely of insults, fact-free talking points, are off-topic, or simply spam the same argument over and over will be deleted. The penguin is the only one allowed to be an ass here. All viewpoints, however, are welcomed, even if I disagree vehemently with you.

WARNING: You are entitled to create your own arguments, but you are NOT entitled to create your own facts. If you spew scientific denialism, or insist that the sky is purple, or otherwise insist that your made-up universe of pink unicorns and cotton candy trees is "real", well -- expect the banhammer.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.