Greedy companys and big Corps that are running this country and the government

You have a number of people, who increasingly feeling they are getting the short end of the stick, and lack of hope, and no one listening to them, coming together to say together they have had enough of what has been going on.

They perform criminal acts (hacking) to get their point across. They're a bunch of spoiled kids in silly terrorist masks (or graphic novel masks, which is just completely silly) looking for an ego and power rush. It does not help to have them endorse a movement (let alone trying to take it over), in fact, it hurts it. The fact that they're continuously trying to put themselves before all of the other protesters is just showing that they're in it for ego reasons. Not only does the protest not need their endorsement, it would do better without their endorsement since then the message is not convoluted by this group of these idiot ego-trip kids in silly masks screaming about how awesome they are because they hack things.

The fact that they're acting like they're a voice of the masses and the protest, when they are not, is really hurting the image of the protest. As I said, it's like if fundamentalist right winged Islamics decided to become the voice of American Liberals to the world.

It is not especially different. Both Fawkes and V resorted to extreme means to fight against oppressive governments, and whether or not they were justified in doing so depends on whom you ask. That was the entire point of V for Vendetta - to make it morally ambiguous so that the reader has to decide for himself whether V is right or just crazy.

Similarly, we each have to decide for ourselves whether Anonymous are right or just dickbags. Based on the past actions done in its name, I vote for the latter.

Was it supposed to be morally ambiguous.
 
It always seeemd pretty onesided to me.

Of course, so did Rorshach being right at the end of Watchmen.

I don't think it was necessarily done all that well, and I personally rather dislike V to the point that it was initially hard for me to believe that it written by the same guy as the brilliant Watchmen, but yeah, according to Moore it was at least intended to be ambiguous. Being an anarchist, Moore undoubtedly sympathizes more with V and so - whether intentionally or not - does seem to lead the reader to see him as the hero, or at least as being better than the government. But with the exception of Finch, everyone is detestable enough that I think you can still take from it what you will.

Of course, if you look at their 14 demands, they certainly aren't against the government or corporations. Instead, they want a lot of heavily left-leaning things such as universal health care, living wages, green energy, and 2 trillion dollars in stimulus. Then they throw in the real crazy stuff like abolishing all held loans by everyone.

Don't forget their demands for both open borders (because outsourcing is bad, but insourcing is not!) and high tariffs (which will be negated by said open borders). A regular bunch of geniuses, this lot.

One can disagree with a bunch of them.  But the current financial system is sitting on a giant bomb of debt, that stands to not get paid off.  There is a biblical concept of the year of Jubilee, where all debt is forgiven.  This concept is also seen in the area of bankruptcy today.  Something is going to have to be done about the global debt bomb being sat on now.  It is seen with economists that the large amount of debt on the part of Americans is holding the economy back, and that needs to get paid down.  More on the concept:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jubilee_(biblical)

Of course, the origins of the whole occupy movement was targeting the federal reserve and the world banking system.  From this came out every single left wing protest angle of course.  I would say better to vent with that, than without.

In mass political movements, one can't expect things to be logical at all.  People who are powered strongly emotionally to go out and protest, will not be consistent.  You see this, for example, in the reactions to Ron Paul.  If you follow what Ron Paul speaks on, it is fairly consistent.  But, when you went Tea Party, the "Ron Paul Revolution" morphed into something else, where it ends up being said "smaller government" and "freedom" but then there is the whole "War on Terror" which then means that personal liberties get reduced in the name of safety, and smaller government ends up being a lie as you need to bloat government to manage a war economy meant to declare preemptive wars against this nation and that to supposedly "secure peace" in the name of Neoconservatism.  Well, in short, it is opposing anything a Democrat does, because they are a Democrat of course.