Opponents of OWS have accused people like Michael Moore of hypocrisy. What is the underlying philosophy of those who make such claims and how does it reveal their system's bankruptcy?
You’ve heard the 1%'ers and their apologists say it to Michael Moore, to Susan Sarandon, and to others who are famous and wealthy: you’re hypocrites for expressing support for the Occupy Movement. Let me get this straight: if you’re wealthy and you refuse to recognize the grotesque unfairness of the division of wealth in society and the injustices too numerous to list, and instead luxuriate in your money, and if you despise and fear the Occupy Movement, then you’re not a hypocrite. But if you have money and you use some of your money, your influence, your voice, and your body to support the Occupy Movement, then you’re nothing but a hypocrite? As someone who I thought liked me said about me recently because he thinks (mistakenly) that he inched into the 1% last year and apparently likes his money and fears the 99% more than he liked me: if Dennis supports the Occupy Movement, why doesn’t he just give away all of his money? Why doesn’t he just work for free and give it all away, if he really supports the 99%? If we take the Occupy Movement’s detractors’ argument seriously, then what do we find underlying their newly found outrage over hypocrisy? Read more here.