A Protest Guide

With such much angst, anger, and outrage in America and with it coming from multiple fronts, it’s probably important to compare and contrast the major groups involved. The lamestream MSM has been “kind” enough to help Americans with this endeavor.

A Comparative Guide To Protests Supplied By The MSM
A Comparative Guide To Protests

Isn’t just so nice of the lamestream media to make these comparisons between the slackers of the Occupy Wall St. mobs and the patriots of the TEA Parties? What would we ever do without their help?

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

4 Responses to “A Protest Guide”

  1. Paradigm Says:

    It’s the fundamental polarity between competition and cooperation. Marx claimed that humanity is the sum of all social relations, thus dismissing individuality and competition altogether. Smith assumed that self-interest largely coincides with the common good (or that cooperation will arise from self-interest) – thus dismissing the value of (altruistic) cooperation.

    It’s all about finding a balance, finding the proper domains and forms for competition and cooperation.

  2. Alan Scott Says:


    Marx was against the status quo. Unfortunately for his followers, whenever his ideals became the status quo, they failed and were accompanied by murder and oppression.

  3. Paradigm Says:

    No argument there. I wasn’t praising Marx.

  4. jonolan Says:


    Actually, if one boils down Marx’s beliefs, it is shown by his own words that he believed that everything was wealth. His views on social relationships were that they were evolutions of Man’s relationship with nature and himself in it.

    He and Adam smith, while largely agreeing on this point, disagreed on what means are needed to distribute such wealth and to what purposes such wealth should be distributed.

    The above doesn’t change the correctness of your statement that a balance must struck between competition and cooperation. One does half to remember, however, that cooperation is only normal against a separate hostile force, be it human or natural.



    I wouldn’t say that such murder and oppression was “unfortunate” for Marx. He was a revolutionary who desired to fundamentally change sociability and humanity unto the very way that they thought. Violence and oppression were accepted tools in that end.

Leave a Reply