Occupy Fails Again...

    
 A GOOD MARXIST NEVER LEARNS.  After WWI, Marx's theory of a world-wide communist take-over turned out to be kind of a flub.  Actually, it didn't happen at all.  Russia's revolution in 1917 was the most successful attempt at world-wide communism, but even that didn't really end well.
     After failing so many times, the Marxists are still trying to take over the world.  This time, it's in the form of Occupy Wall Street.  A recent panel discussion featuring top-brass commies and union bosses, asked the questions all Marxists ask when their revolutions fail: "What the heck happened, man?"
          Marxist theorists answered that question shortly after WWI.  People were happy with capitalism.  Their solution, then, was no to target the working-people, but different social groups.  Cultural Marxism.  The cancer of any great society. 
     Occupiers must have short memories, though, because they've come full circle to the dawn of Marxism.  They've abandoned the cultural Marxism that actually did work to destroy the fabric of a strong society.  They want to take down capitalism the old-fashioned way: by targeting the working class.  It didn't work before and most likely won't work now.
     However, the one thing Marxists are successful at is violence.  Revolutions have never been peaceful, and the coming Occupy movements aren't projected to be either.  David Graeber, one of the panelists said:

"It's a revolution, it didn't start here.  It started in Tunisia.  It travelled across the Mediterranean to Europe, to Spain, to Greece.  Now it's come here.  It's a world revolution we're experiencing."

     A man had to set himself on fire to start the revolutions that quickly spread throughout the world. 

     Luckily, capitalism is the preferred system for the common, sane person.  A violent attempt at revolution, and ending capitalism, will only more deeply root people's feelings for capitalism and, well, sanity. 

Why Most Artists Are Liberals (Reading of the Communist Manifesto Pt. 1)

     KARL MARX, in the "Communist Manifesto", repeatedly uses the "little guy" as an example when arguing the struggle between the oppressed and oppressors.  One of the "little guys" he mentions are artisans.  This could be the reason, be it consciously or sub-consciously, many artists (both fine artists and craftsman) feel themselves leaning toward liberal collectivist doctrine...in other words Communism.  I guess Marx never imagined artists could sell their work and become celebrities in the free market, eh?

Here is Marx citing the artisan in chapter one of the "Communist Manifesto":

"The lower middle class, the small manufacturer, the shopkeeper, the artisan, the peasant, all these fight against the bourgeoisie"