Moved from D1 forum

[--Pete]

Hi,

Calling me childish and ungrateful cause my politics dont agree with his.

I believe I called your statements childish and ungrateful. (EDIT: I also called your expectations childish). I don't know anything about you, personally, so I really can't say. However, if you did indeed invoke the ignore function, I will hazard that you are closed minded. If so, I probably don't want to know anything about you.

--Pete

[DeeBye]

Thanks for this. I almost never read the D1 forum anymore. That was quite the epic post.

Here are some words that were used. I've listed them totally out of context, but it's sort of funny how using them in the context of the post doesn't change the impact much.

Wal-Mart
Nike
war machine
global imperialism
Marxist
un-American
capitalism
economic social darwinism
most evil and detrimental system
socially constructed
imperialism
racism
human suffering
exploitation
Tea Baggers
consumerism
materialism
economy

I, too, wish to remark upon my displeasure with Blizzard for not supporting a game that they released in 1996 and then go right off the deep end.

[Tal]

I, too, wish to remark upon my displeasure with Blizzard for not supporting a game that they released in 1996 and then go right off the deep end.

You may do so provided you keep the conversation civil. =)

[DeeBye]

You may do so provided you keep the conversation civil. =)

That sounds like Nazi talk. Don't curtail my freedoms.

[--Pete]

Hi,

Don't curtail my freedoms.

This is the Lounge. You have no freedoms. Anything not banned is mandatory.

--Pete

[NuurAbSaal]

Hi,

Don't curtail my freedoms.

This is the Lounge. You have no freedoms. Anything not banned is mandatory.

--Pete

Perfect!

I'll continue to be the fanboi in lurk-mode.

take care
Tarabulus

[Jester]

In Soviet Russia, game patch you!

-Jester

[kandrathe]

I believe I called your statements childish and ungrateful.

Which part would you call childish? The one where he says you are a conservative tea partier? Rofl! Or, the implication that you engage in a homosexual act?

For young idealists, trashing capitalism has been in vogue since the late 1800's gave rise to the abuses of the industrial revolution, and yet there is some form of it in every nation (to my knowledge). Before industrialists, the wealthy were known as "the ruling class" and supported monarchy.

China would be one of the best examples of what happens with, and without capitalism. Were it not for their usurpation of the rule of law and lack of egalitarianism, they could be the most powerful nation on the planet (due to their economic power). It is childish to expect handouts, and to get something for nothing. What could be more paternal than to expect to be taken care of by the State, and to renounce your ability own property. I don't favor the abuses of capitalism, but I do think we need to rely on the fruits of capitalism. One of which is that we will take care of things that we own, but we won't care as much about something we are merely using. If our children have the potential to inherit this thing we own, we will endeavor to keep it in good condition. Ownership by the state removes both the positive and negative emotions, and often the utility (e.g. in the extreme, who wants a communal toothbrush).

"If markets reflect human choice of actions, then competition is at its heart. When competition is understood to be the logical outcome of choices that drive economic behavior, then markets can be seen as a pure, if crude, form of democracy. And the outcomes can be crude indeed. However, contempt and condemnation for market outcomes reflects an elitist view of the choices of the unwashed and ill-tutored. Those who accept such nonsense have taken the notion of "fallen man" a bit too far while being equipped with too little knowledge. It might be said that the market, like democracy, is the worst economic system available except all the others." -- Dr. Christopher Lingle

I would love to see D1 reworked with more modern graphics, and since they still own it, they might do that someday. Were it in the public domain, then any aspiring competitor would be able to alter it in anyway they wanted. Anyone who saw the Gus Van Sant remake of 'Psycho' can see the negative potential if a classic gets into the wrong hands.

The Diablo series, and the game company exist because the US affords the rights of people to own intellectual property, including copyrights on software and designs. The tremendous hardware we enjoy playing these games on keeps doubling in power every few years directly due to the competition between manufacturers of the computers, components, and chips. Competition has been a characteristic of humanity since a cave man one day hauled in the bigger antelope to camp, and scored the hottest gatherer babes. Then the other geeky cave men invented socialism.

It's nothing more than an excuse by the wealthy and powerful to exploit those who have less resources or who are less fortunate and to promote social darwinism in other socially constructed aspects be it imperialism, racism, or otherwise; then turn it around and use the folklore that you described to justify its means to an end, regardless of the human suffering, alienation, and exploitation it both creates and manifests.

Because, the Marxist movements over the past millennium have been so bloodless? Tyranny in any form is evil, when wielded by oligarchs, theocrats, industrialists, or social engineers.



Just between the Soviets and China you have 100 million deaths based on anti-capitalism and, then we could talk about the Khmer Rouge, and Pol Pot for a couple million more dead... So, get off the high horse. And... I'm not trying to white wash the blood trail of greed, from *real* Imperialism, exploitation, pollution, and other suffering at the hands of economic tyranny. Marx envisioned a world without the need for a "State", a place evolved to beyond socialism, and communism. The motivation of the wealthy is merely a return on investment, and whatever evil occurs in capitalism results from amorally following that axiom. It is easy to demagogue "the wealthy" as an uncaring, group of money grubbing scrooges. I offer you Bill Gates as an example. I mean it's pretty shocking how just the global health care portion of the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation contributes more to world health than the entire UN World Health Organization.

However, we've seen repeatedly that once the "State" (in any form) gets enough power, it is misused and tyranny results. The revolutionary experiment in the US was to try to build a form of limited government, where the power remains with the people (not the corporations, or any government). It's still a work in progress and we've strayed a bit lately from that ideal. The "tea party" that you denounced are in favor of personal freedom through returning to limited government, but not, by and large, in favor of unfettering the reasonable restrictions on corporate responsibilities (e.g. pollution, fair labor, non-discrimination, etc.

Anyway, that's just this Nazi forum trolls opinion.

[Tal]

You may do so provided you keep the conversation civil. =)

That sounds like Nazi talk. Don't curtail my freedoms.

Aaaaand now my mental picture of DeeBye looking like Rick Moranis has been updated to look like William Wallace.

[Jester]

I mean it's pretty shocking how just the global health care portion of the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation contributes more to world health than the entire UN World Health Organization.

I'm wondering what the basis for this claim is? The Bill and Melinda Gates foundation does good work, and they have a gigantic endowment, but I'm not sure what the metric would be for measuring them against the WHO.

-Jester

[shoju]

Did I miss something?

I went to the D1 board.
I read that Blizzard is giving up the ghost on D1, as in.... No longer actively taking the time to sell the game. Now, Humor me here, because I'm making an assumption that this is what started the fracas, and I'm trying to understand.

Diablo was released november 30, 1996. 5 months, and 17 days short of 15 years ago. The game hasn't been produced on disc format in years. It was only available as a digital download. Now, I just checked my Battle.net account, and I can no longer purchase Diablo I.

I can't find a download size for Diablo, but DII comes in at a hefty 14.4 MB file size for the download. I would assume, since it is more "advanced" than Diablo, the original game couldn't be much bigger.

But for arguments sake, lets assume that it was bigger. Lets say that it was 20mb in size. That would make it 38.888% larger than DII. at 20mb, and based on the price point it was being offered at, It would mean that Blizzard is either:


a.) Paying an ridiculously high price for their hosting / storage / backup equipment, to the point where 20mb more of data was incurring huge, (and I do mean HUGE) price per MB of Host / storage / backup, meaning that the finite number of sales that they made per month on the game weren't covering the hosting costs,


OR (the more likely candidate)

b.) There REALLY isn't that much traffic for Diablo I.

20MB in size is so minuscule to my businesses hosting / storage / backup data plans, and I'm a small business with 30 total employees. I'm the only IT employee. I have a server with 50TB, I have 90gb of fully mirrored web space, 9tb bandwith for traffic each month, and I guarantee you my hosting costs are finite. They would have to be averaging 1.72 sales per 5 years digitally before I would even incur a LOSS of a single cent. And that's assuming that I just host it with everything else, back it up, have it mirrored, have it on my server, have it backed up on both removable media and my NAS box Capitalism.


Capitalism has nothing to do with this decision. This decision is based on the blip on the radar that is Diablo I traffic. That blip is too small. Remove it, and move on.

You want to know how "not news" this really is? I can't find a single other person commenting on Diablo / download / purchase in a current conversation using my best search practices.

[--Pete]

Hi,

... you are a conservative tea partier? Rofl!

Yeah. Amazing how the people who think they've found a simple, extreme, solution for everything accuse anyone not at their extreme of being at the opposite extreme. It's as if their minds are too small to hold anything but the endpoints of the scale.

Or, the implication that you engage in a homosexual act?

I missed that. Should I be offended? Next time there's a get together, I'll ask my gay friends.

China ... could be the most powerful nation on the planet ...

They are moving that way.

I don't favor the abuses of capitalism, but I do think we need to rely on the fruits of capitalism.

Exactly. The excesses of unrestrained capitalism are well established in history. But only a fool would propose to cure severe dehydration by drowning the patient. A fool such as Marx.

"It might be said that the market, like democracy, is the worst economic system available except all the others." -- Dr. Christopher Lingle

Lingle is right (IMO) in principle, although a bit off in his reference. I think it was Winnie (Churchill, not Pooh) who said that democracy is the worst form of government except for all the others we've tried. Perhaps we've just not yet found the "genu wine Indian Guru / Who's teaching us a better way" to get on the cover of Forbes. Unlimited democracy is mob rule. Put too many limits on it, and it ceases to be democracy (except, perhaps, in name). Similar things can be said of capitalism. Both the political form (democracy) and the economic theory (capitalism) need to be bounded to be useful.

I would love to see D1 reworked with more modern graphics, ..

The only changes I'd like to see is bug fixes. Get MS right (increased protection at increased levels and fix stun). Eliminate shooting/seeing through corners. Calculate the intersection of a ranged weapon and a moving target correctly. A few others that I can't recall right off the bat, but that would come to mind after a little while of playing the game. Oh, and jack up the difficulty in NM and Hell so that they pick up from the end and not the middle of Normal and NM respectively (and make them directly accessible in SP).

The graphics are just fine. Between the graphics and the music, the Gothic nature of the game is well served.

Competition has been a characteristic of humanity since a cave man one day hauled in the bigger antelope to camp, and scored the hottest gatherer babes. Then the other geeky cave men invented socialism.

--Pete

[--Pete]

Hi,

Did I miss something?

Yes.

Now, Humor me here, because I'm making an assumption that this is what started the fracas, and I'm trying to understand.

You missed the point entirely. I took objection to:

Thats cause Blizz is a corporation that only cares about making a profit, everything else be damned. Capitalism for the loss.

I gave my reasons and my opinions in the reply to that post. This thread is the continuation of that exchange, which has little or nothing to do with Diablo (one, two, or three), Blizzard, Condor, etc. and everything to do with political and economic theories. Hence, slightly appropriate for this snake pit but not at all for the D1 forum.

The original topic was lost in the exchange, and your post addresses that original topic and not this side issue. Your post is more appropriate for the original thread in the D1 forum.

Oh, and just to continue an off topic conversation on an off topic spin off thread: I suspect why Blizzard is dropping D1 support has more to do with the difficulty of keeping b.net secure and yet compatible with D1 than it does with any financial considerations. But that's just a WAG, with a value somewhere between pristine and used toilet paper.

--Pete

---

Hi,

Because, the Marxist movements over the past millennium have been so bloodless?

Over about 85% of the past millennium, not only has the Marxist movement been bloodless, it's been non-existent.

BTW, great big major changes might be better as new posts than as edits to old posts -- otherwise, it becomes very hard to follow the conversation.

--Pete

[kandrathe]

I mean it's pretty shocking how just the global health care portion of the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation contributes more to world health than the entire UN World Health Organization.

I'm wondering what the basis for this claim is? The Bill and Melinda Gates foundation does good work, and they have a gigantic endowment, but I'm not sure what the metric would be for measuring them against the WHO.

I read it... but...

BMGF -- 2009 Annual Report grant summary Grants paid out to global health - $1.826 billion

The entire budget of the WHO was at that time $4.2 billion (of which they spend about $3.5 billion, 85%), but it appears that the entire outlay of research grants is less than a billion. Some of which it gets from the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation. It's hard to get an accurate financial picture, as they break down their finances by strategic objective, by nation, and by program, but never break it down enough to show how much gets to those who need it.

I'm having trouble even finding exactly how many people are employed, and the gross budget for salaries. There is the boiler plate on the about page, "More than 8000 people from more than 150 countries work for the Organization in 147 country offices, six regional offices and at the headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland." Just how many are out in the field delivering aid, as opposed to pushing paper in the office is hard to tell.

The estimates I've seen attribute about 60 to 80% of the WHO budget spent on bureaucracy. From their regional expenditures, I can see that about $1.5 billion (about 1/3) was expended in Switzerland.

Anyway... The bottom line, and my point was that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation's spending on global health is very high, comparable to USAID, and WHO. These evil capitalists, even the ones that I don't like, have this way of de-scrooging themselves by focusing their financial gains on philanthropic benevolence. Anyway, back in the 80's I despised Bill, and how bamboozled Seattle Computer Products (who had in fact borrowed heavily from CP/M). I started to give him a break back in the late 80's when I saw at trade events how his super model dates treated him (i.e. badly).

There are quite a few free games out there, but the majority of them are quite likely resume builders, or skill builders. The person is making them because they want to get better at writing code, or to have something to show at an interview. Their goal in most cases I would bet is to make money from those skills or that product down the road. It might be from working for someone else it might be by starting their own company.

Other than padding the resume... Many times "we", the programmers, write the games because we want to play it with our friends. When I worked for MECC, someone bought and was playing Microwave for the Apple II which is a Pacman rip off. Anyway, we "the programmers" were interested in some of the mechanics allowing the animation to move smoothly, and one thing led to another and we ended up reverse engineering it to see how it ticked. We ended up creating a very fun multi-user LAN version of Microwave we called "death taxi" that never was released as an educational game (sort of a team based Pacman FPS). But, from what we learned, a whole series of smoothly animated educational games were created for the Apple II. Around the same time, there was this guy, Alan Klietz, who wrote a multi-user game called "Scepter of Goth", which contributed to the spawn of the MUD movement (back when rather than graphics games were played with words).

And, I remember another example at a former software house I worked at, we got into a big discussion about a deficiency in the software language we were using. By the next weekend, we had disassembled, corrected, and reassembled the language to correct the deficiencies, and in fact added many new features we had also desired. Over time, it became the standard, and eventually management learned about our "skunk works" project and packaged it as a product. Of course, after that it was hard to just make changes whenever we wanted to "our language". A modern example would be Martin Dougiamas, and Moodle. It started as a Ph.D project "to examine "The use of Open Source software to support a social constructionist epistemology of teaching and learning within Internet-based communities of reflective inquiry".

It's easier, and harder to build modern games. Easier due to the inherent graphics card abilities, but harder due to the demands for adequate looking 3D graphics rendering. But, I think most undergraduate computer science students could master enough network protocol handshaking to build a multi-user game for casual (read unsecure) play over a network. If I were in the same position now, as I was in the 80's I'd probably take a stab at convincing my co-workers to help me make Morrowind a multiplayer game (for private use).

So, anyway, its not always about getting the job. Many of the creative people in software development, do it at work and then never shut if off. It's the nature of our employment contracts that restrict us from handing away our work for free, since the companies we work for claim the rights to what we produce (24x7).

[Kevin]

As a note the whole response is not directly to Shoju's post, but I'm starting out from there.

Diablo was released november 30, 1996. 5 months, and 17 days short of 15 years ago. The game hasn't been produced on disc format in years. It was only available as a digital download. Now, I just checked my Battle.net account, and I can no longer purchase Diablo I.

There are other costs involved in software than what your analysis covered (customer support costs, etc.) but they are very likely negligible at this point too and I agree that the decision had nothing to do with current costs.

However not releasing the source code like was done with FreeSpace2 which has kept it alive in via the FreeSpace2 Open project. It still requires that you have a copy of the original game, which you can still get on Good Old Games - FreeSpace2 but it still isn't free, GOG holds rights to it, and they still charge. The source code is free, but the rights to the game are not.

With the Diablo franchise, the rights could actually still have an impact on the other games in the franchise. With FS2 Volition went out of business, though some of their IP was purchased by one of the bigger companies out there. So the argument for not releasing the source code to Diablo to the community to improve (and FS2 has been improved) may actually have some bearing in capitalism. Blizzard still holds the rights to everything and they may in the future release the source code, but likely they won't and it could come down to the potential to still make money.


Of course without capitalism, I'm not sure we would have gotten the Diablo game. Yes, Blizzard started out with "We want to make games we love to play and we won't release it till it's ready" But the designers weren't working for free and likely wouldn't have. There are quite a few free games out there, but the majority of them are quite likely resume builders, or skill builders. The person is making them because they want to get better at writing code, or to have something to show at an interview. Their goal in most cases I would bet is to make money from those skills or that product down the road. It might be from working for someone else it might be by starting their own company.

If I were Blizzard would I cut off support for D1 15 years later? Yeah I very likely would because as Shoju said I suspect there isn't much call for it anymore. Would I release the source code to it, but still hold the rights? As mentioned I don't know all the legal implications of that. I likely wouldn't. Especially when you consider that most of the people that wrote that code don't work for Blizzard anymore. The size of the Blizzard fan base that has never played Diablo in any form at all is very likely larger than the portion that did. Is it callous, is it pure greed, is it putting someone down, is it morally objectionable to keep those rights? I don't think so. Just like I don't think it's morally objectionable for me to not let anyone in the world be able to drive my car whenever they want, or for them to copy a book that still has an active copyright.

I wandered a bit and I've been writing this off and on, on my breaks and during my lunch hour, for long enough. Time to hit submit.

[shoju]

There are other costs involved in software than what your analysis covered (customer support costs, etc.) but they are very likely negligible at this point too and I agree that the decision had nothing to do with current costs.

Right, I was trying to be simplistic, and address more so the 'continuous' support of it, since I don't think they are offering much support for the D/DII games (I tried to mess with DII, and couldn't get much help from them on why it wouldn't install properly)

To your other point, blizz fanbase who has / hasn't played Diablo I/II. World of Warcraft was my first blizzard product, and will probably be my last blizzard product. Not because there is something "wrong' with them, or the like, but I tried Starcraft, not my bag. Diablo's setting is "eh" for me. The Warcraft games, were.... not my thing either.

My son, has never played anything but WoW. I at least tried the other games, but only after I played WoW, and wondered about the others.

I mean hell, Diablo was released before my oldest was born.

[--Pete]

Hi,

I love this place.

A D1 related post is made in the D1 forum. OK, that makes sense.

A reply to that post is just a political/economic rant. Happens all the time.

A reply to the rant starts an off-topic discussion. Par for the course.

An attempt is made to move the off topic discussion to the off topic forum. Hey, it was a try.

The off topic discussion goes off topic (nothing new there) by going back to the original topic which is in another thread on another forum. That could only happen in the Lurker Lounge

--Pete

[DeeBye]

The graphics are just fine. Between the graphics and the music, the Gothic nature of the game is well served.

The graphics of D1 and D2 are far from "fine". They look like absolute garbage on current monitors. 640x480 or even 800x600 resolution scaled up on a current 1920x1080 LCD looks awful. I love D1 and D2 both to death, but I simply cannot play them anymore due to the ugly graphics.

The music is still great though.

[Nystul]

The graphics of D1 and D2 are far from "fine". They look like absolute garbage on current monitors. 640x480 or even 800x600 resolution scaled up on a current 1920x1080 LCD looks awful. I love D1 and D2 both to death, but I simply cannot play them anymore due to the ugly graphics.

The music is still great though.

I don't mind the look of Diablo at all, as long as I can get the monitor to scale it with the proper aspect ratio. As for Diablo II, it was ugly from the day they released it, regardless of monitor.

[FireIceTalon]

I believe I called your statements childish and ungrateful.

Which part would you call childish? The one where he says you are a conservative tea partier? Rofl! Or, the implication that you engage in a homosexual act?

For young idealists, trashing capitalism has been in vogue since the late 1800's gave rise to the abuses of the industrial revolution, and yet there is some form of it in every nation (to my knowledge). Before industrialists, the wealthy were known as "the ruling class" and supported monarchy.

China would be one of the best examples of what happens with, and without capitalism. Were it not for their usurpation of the rule of law and lack of egalitarianism, they could be the most powerful nation on the planet (due to their economic power). It is childish to expect handouts, and to get something for nothing. What could be more paternal than to expect to be taken care of by the State, and to renounce your ability own property. I don't favor the abuses of capitalism, but I do think we need to rely on the fruits of capitalism. One of which is that we will take care of things that we own, but we won't care as much about something we are merely using. If our children have the potential to inherit this thing we own, we will endeavor to keep it in good condition. Ownership by the state removes both the positive and negative emotions, and often the utility (e.g. in the extreme, who wants a communal toothbrush).

"If markets reflect human choice of actions, then competition is at its heart. When competition is understood to be the logical outcome of choices that drive economic behavior, then markets can be seen as a pure, if crude, form of democracy. And the outcomes can be crude indeed. However, contempt and condemnation for market outcomes reflects an elitist view of the choices of the unwashed and ill-tutored. Those who accept such nonsense have taken the notion of "fallen man" a bit too far while being equipped with too little knowledge. It might be said that the market, like democracy, is the worst economic system available except all the others." -- Dr. Christopher Lingle

I would love to see D1 reworked with more modern graphics, and since they still own it, they might do that someday. Were it in the public domain, then any aspiring competitor would be able to alter it in anyway they wanted. Anyone who saw the Gus Van Sant remake of 'Psycho' can see the negative potential if a classic gets into the wrong hands.

The Diablo series, and the game company exist because the US affords the rights of people to own intellectual property, including copyrights on software and designs. The tremendous hardware we enjoy playing these games on keeps doubling in power every few years directly due to the competition between manufacturers of the computers, components, and chips. Competition has been a characteristic of humanity since a cave man one day hauled in the bigger antelope to camp, and scored the hottest gatherer babes. Then the other geeky cave men invented socialism.

It's nothing more than an excuse by the wealthy and powerful to exploit those who have less resources or who are less fortunate and to promote social darwinism in other socially constructed aspects be it imperialism, racism, or otherwise; then turn it around and use the folklore that you described to justify its means to an end, regardless of the human suffering, alienation, and exploitation it both creates and manifests.

Because, the Marxist movements over the past millennium have been so bloodless? Tyranny in any form is evil, when wielded by oligarchs, theocrats, industrialists, or social engineers.



Just between the Soviets and China you have 100 million deaths based on anti-capitalism and, then we could talk about the Khmer Rouge, and Pol Pot for a couple million more dead... So, get off the high horse. And... I'm not trying to white wash the blood trail of greed, from *real* Imperialism, exploitation, pollution, and other suffering at the hands of economic tyranny. Marx envisioned a world without the need for a "State", a place evolved to beyond socialism, and communism. The motivation of the wealthy is merely a return on investment, and whatever evil occurs in capitalism results from amorally following that axiom. It is easy to demagogue "the wealthy" as an uncaring, group of money grubbing scrooges. I offer you Bill Gates as an example. I mean it's pretty shocking how just the global health care portion of the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation contributes more to world health than the entire UN World Health Organization.

However, we've seen repeatedly that once the "State" (in any form) gets enough power, it is misused and tyranny results. The revolutionary experiment in the US was to try to build a form of limited government, where the power remains with the people (not the corporations, or any government). It's still a work in progress and we've strayed a bit lately from that ideal. The "tea party" that you denounced are in favor of personal freedom through returning to limited government, but not, by and large, in favor of unfettering the reasonable restrictions on corporate responsibilities (e.g. pollution, fair labor, non-discrimination, etc.

Anyway, that's just this Nazi forum trolls opinion.

Too bad neither the USSR nor China were ever truly communist, but rather, totalitarian. A true communist society, in the context of Marx's theory, has never been seen before. So to say that Marxism has produced much blood shed is, technically, incorrect. It's so funny that people love to say Marxists are these evil people that want to kill everyone and control the world, yet if you read Marx's theories you would see there is a huge difference between Marxism and Stalinism or Maoism. Marx would have turned over in his grave if he knew the actions of either dictator. You guys may not agree with Marx, but the guy, right or wrong, was a genius and his theory represents, more than anyone else's, the central struggle of humankind. You can criticize him all you want, but at the end of the day, everyone on this board, including myself, is an intellectual peon compared to him

And as for the Tea Party, that's just their problem, they dont get it: big government isnt the problem, but rather big business is the problem, and thats what they fail to see. Transnationals have far more power and control in both the business world and our daily lives than so-called big government does. We have constitutional amendments to protect us from "big government", but no such amendments to protect us from corporations. Yea, I have some problems with big government too, but most of that ties into the fact they act as an executive for carrying out the agendas of Wall Street banksters and CEO's who have far more political power than the common citizen. If big government is the problem, its only because of the symbiosis they have with big business, everyone else be damned. As I said before, capitalism is not just merely bad for the economic inequality it creates between social classes as how Marx pointed out, but its evils go far beyond that: for what it PROMOTES: materialism, consumerism, anti-intellectualism, and "false consciousness". Americans in general are pretty stupid compared to their European counterparts when it comes to politics, and thus they take part less in the political process which is why our political culture here is so weak. Because were too busy worrying about buying that 3 million dollar mansion, filling up that Mercedes SUV and get raped at the pump while the oil companies laugh all the way to the bank, chatting on FaceBook and twitter, to the exclusion of almost everything else......meanwhile the Republican Party and the Tea Party want to cut every social service in the book so civil society itself collapses, give tax breaks to the wealthy, all in the name of making oil and weapons contract companies richer by use of counter-terrorism. And no, im not bashing capitalism because its fashionable to do so, but rather because, it sucks

Socialism > capitalism. For without equality, you cannot have freedom or democracy, not the other way around. Anyway, thats my perspective. But then again, im just a young naive, political science/sociology major in his 30's that thinks people can (and should) put their self interest aside for the greater good - nothing more, nothing less. Heh.