Well, the post was titled "Ask Slashdot: how do you view the Wall Street protests?" and my answer was that they are inspiring, more relevant than indicated by the media, and if they grew in size they could really get the attention of a congress which is otherwise dumb deaf and blind towards its electorate. What I find hilarious, but also pathetic, about your post, is that by demanding I address issues which are not essential to the discussion at hand, you are able to determine that I am uneducated politically, and the same as the Chinese cultural revolution, the Hitler Youth Brigade, etc. I wonder what information you use in general to reach conclusions, and how this determines your political ideas?
As I indicated in my post, there are a variety of problems that most people can see. Some that I think are especially important are overturning the Citizens United decision, eliminating tax loopholes for the wealthy (capital gains, etc.), shifting education funding away from local property taxes and towards taxes collected at the state or federal level, establishing a cabinet secretary dedicated to the quality of life and political representation of the citizen, limiting more stringently the leverage ratio of banks while increasing their liquidity and capital requirements, funding research and development for sustainable energy, and nationalizing health care. I'm sure there are important issues that others see as more problematic. I think unifying dissatisfaction over several topics, by highlighting the disproportionate political power of corporations, and banks in particular, can strengthen the movement politically.
I notice that you are quick and severe in your attack, but you yourself say nothing about your political beliefs while condemning me for not being more specific about mine. Do you support the status quo, or do you have a superior protest I can join?