G oog le BadWeB | Login/out | Topics | Search | Custodians | Register | Edit Profile


Buell Forum » Quick Board » Archives » Archive through November 07, 2011 » The 99%ers Shrug? « Previous Next »

Author Message
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Chauly
Posted on Friday, November 04, 2011 - 11:50 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

This came across my desk. PM me if you want to know more about this guy...

TIA Daily • October 28, 2011

FEATURE ARTICLE

Occupy Wall Street Shrugged

A Leftist Children's Theater Group Puts on a Curious Show

by Robert Tracinski

What are we to make of the Occupy Wall Street movement that has sprung up in recent
months?

Certainly the agitators behind this movement are far-left ideologues. Kevin
Williamson went down to Zuccotti Park and reported back that "Almost every
organization present at OWS is explicitly communist or socialist. Almost every piece
of literature being handed out is explicitly communist or socialist. I don't mean
half, and I don't mean the overwhelming majority—I mean almost all of it.... It's
been a long time since I saw anybody peddling books by Lenin."

But my sense is that the rank and file is not so explicitly ideological, and the
overall message they have been sending is vague and incoherent. Part of what is
driving the movement is Tahrir envy and Tea Party envy: left-leaning kids see other
groups rising up in successful mass protests, and they don't want to be left out of
the fun. But the actual precedent for the movement is a series of protests and tent
camps that sprang up in Israel over the summer, You see the same combination:
inchoate economic discontent, organized behind the scenes by the far left, but with
a purposely vague message that allows the protests to attract a larger audience,
mostly drawn from the college-educated middle class and upper middle class.

The same goes for Occupy Wall Street. It is perhaps best understood as a form of
children's theater for middle-class college kids.

The Washington Times got its hands on some internal documents agonizing over the
monolithic composition of Occupy Wall Street, which is dominated by 20-year-old
white middle-class college boys. I strolled through our local branch, Occupy
Charlottesville, and found a small group instantly recognizable as standard-issue
lefties from the local university, all carefully dressed in the uniformly eclectic
I-want-to-be-a-nonconformist-just-like-everyone-el se style of the "counterculture"
establishment that holds sway on college campuses. If you want to be really radical
in this group, show up in a dress shirt and tie or a Carhartt jacket.

Deeply ignorant of the actual workings of the economy, they have been indoctrinated
with leftist ideas in school and regaled with highly glamorized stories about the
student protests of 1960s. So this is their chance to put on a show and live in a
little temporary microcosm of their leftist ideal. The most unintentionally
insightful comment I've heard about the movement is that it defined less by ideology
or by a specific agenda than it is by the "the identity they are trying to
construct." It's all a kind of fashion statement, like wearing Birkenstocks.

Or put it another way. There are Civil War re-enactors and World War II re-enactors,
and now we have 1960s re-enactors. As with all such re-enactments, it's on a much
smaller and less impressive scale than the original. In the 1960s, as the famous
song had it, by the time they got to Woodstock, they were half a million strong. But
as Dana Milbank observes, by the time they got to Occupy DC, "they numbered only
53." Outside St. Paul's Cathedral in London, nine out of ten tents are empty at
night while the protesters go home, presumably to a warm bed and a shower. In
Zuccotti Park, protesters are at times outnumbered by curious tourists and the media
that arrives to give them glowing coverage.

(Part of the marketing genius of Occupy Wall Street is the fact that they set
themselves up in Manhattan. For the big centers of the mainstream media, Zuccotti
Park is just a short subway ride away, with no need for time-consuming and expensive
trips to unglamorous flyover country to find out what's bothering the Omaha Tea
Party.)

But if this is basically a form of street theater, it has been acting out some
stories that weren't in the original script. A protest against the evils of
capitalism has been churning out some cautionary tales about the troubles of
socialism.

There is the creepy groupthink of the "human microphone," which involves a giant
crowd repeating in unison every word a speaker says. And even some lefties who
showed up expecting a leaderless rule by "consensus" are discovering that some
Occupiers are more equal than others. When the organizers attempted to suppress the
disruptive noise of the drum circle (a standard accoutrement at this kind of event),
the drummers complained that they were being railroaded.


To Shane Engelerdt, a 19-year-old from Jersey City and self-described former "head
drummer," this amounted to a Jacobinic betrayal. "They are becoming the government
we're trying to protest," he said. "They didn't even give the drummers a say....
Drumming is the heartbeat of this movement. Look around: This is dead, you need a
pulse to keep something alive."
The drummers claim that the finance working group even levied a percussion tax of
sorts, taking up to half of the $150-300 a day that the drum circle was receiving in
tips. "Now they have over $500,000 from all sorts of places," said Engelerdt. "We're
like, what's going on here? They're like the banks we're protesting."

One organizer's response is a chilling: "Someone has to be told what to do. Someone
needs to give orders."

I won't be the first to point out that Occupy Wall Street is not like the banks, nor
are they like the government these people are protesting against. It's like the
government these people are protesting for, and the protesters are now the ones who
find themselves complaining about taxes and regulations and overbearing government.

In a microcosm of the pressure-group warfare of the welfare state, factions are
beginning to tussle over the distribution of hundreds of thousands of dollars
donated to the movement. Some protesters have responding by holding onto the
donations they receive rather than sharing them with the collective. Funny how that
works. My favorite you-can't-make-this-up quote is from Pete Dutro of the
organizers' finance group: "The vast majority of the people here don't understand
how money works." That's an interesting admission to make about a movement whose
core issue is how money works.

Not surprisingly, Occupy Wall Street has become a magnet for thieves and con-men. As
one organizer complains, "Stealing is our biggest problem at the moment."

Then there are the bums. Originally, from what I can tell, street people were
actively recruited by the Occupiers as a way of adding to their somewhat anemic
numbers. But the naïve young hippies who make up the bulk of the movement are
quickly discovering what the rest of us, with the benefit of actual life experience,
already know about "the homeless."

Over at Occupy Boston, a protester complains, "It's turning into us against them.
They come in here and they're looking at it as a way of getting a free meal and a
place to crash, which is totally fine, but they don't bring anything to the table at
all." Another report concludes with a similar sentiment.


"We have compassion toward everyone. However, we have certain rules and guidelines,"
said Lauren Digioia, 26, a member of the sanitation committee. "If you're going to
come here and get our food, bedding and clothing, have books and medical supplies
for no charge, they need to give back," Digioia said. "There's a lot of takers here
and they feel entitled."
These people had better watch out. If they start thinking that like this, pretty
soon they might find themselves at a Tea Party rally.

But the story that caps off everything is the spaghetti Bolognese incident. I'll let
the New York Post tell the story.


The Occupy Wall Street volunteer kitchen staff launched a "counter" revolution
yesterday—because they're angry about working 18-hour days to provide food for
"professional homeless" people and ex-cons masquerading as protesters.
For three days beginning tomorrow, the cooks will serve only brown rice and other
Spartan grub instead of the usual menu of organic chicken and vegetables, spaghetti
Bolognese, and roasted beet and sheep's-milk-cheese salad.

They will also provide directions to local soup kitchens for the vagrants, criminals
and other freeloaders who have been descending on Zuccotti Park in increasing
numbers every day.

To show they mean business, the kitchen staff refused to serve any food for two
hours yesterday in order to meet with organizers to air their grievances, sources
said.

The first thing to notice about this story is the "bourgeois bohemian" snobbery of
these enlightened, egalitarian progressives. These are a bunch of middle class kids
in the middle of Manhattan, which is basically a giant playground for the
upper-middle-class and the rich, who have sent down to Zuccotti the chefs from their
favorite gourmet organic restaurants. But while spaghetti Bolognese is fine for
folks like you and me—you know, good respectable bourgeois—we can't have the actual
grubby poor showing up to demand some of it. So let's serve them gruel and fob them
off on the local soup kitchen. I mean, don't they know their place?

And yet you have to sympathize with the cooks who have been besieged by moochers.
Behind the hypocrisy, there are real lessons to be learned: lessons about the
relationship between productive people and freeloaders. About the need for police to
protect decent people from criminals. About how con-men and the power-lusters always
take over utopian schemes for their own benefit. About the taxing power and
unaccountability of central authorities.

The spaghetti Bolognese incident sums it up. The workers who provide the goods
everyone else lives off of are going on strike to protest against their exploitation
by freeloaders. Has anyone else noticed that this is the basic plot premise of Ayn
Rand's Atlas Shrugged? Yet that is the story line they are unintentionally acting
out. Call it Occupy Wall Street Shrugged.

There is something repugnant and undemocratic about this movement, summed up in the
very word "Occupy," a term that implies force and violent repression. The Tea Party
movement has been vilified as racists and murderers, but they never said they were
going to "occupy" anybody, because their goal is to set people free. My local Tea
Party group always gets permits for its rallies, would never dream of tussling with
the police, and leaves every venue cleaner than they found it. Their main activities
have included hosting public forums on ObamaCare, debates for congressional
candidates, and talks and speeches on other vital issues. Since Virginia holds its
elections on odd-numbered years, they are now busy with forums in which Tea Partiers
are quizzing candidates for the state senate, the House of Delegates, and the County
Board of Supervisors.

The Occupy Wall Street people are free to do the same. Instead, they gravitate
toward petty acts of disruption like pushing all of the buttons in the elevators of
the Hart Senate Office Building. Less amusing is the next logical step. When
protesters at Occupy Philadelphia heard that Eric Cantor, the number two Republican
leader in the House, was scheduled to speak at the Wharton School at the University
of Pennsylvania, they marched down to the university to disrupt the event, prompting
Cantor to cancel the speech. They called it "Occupy Eric Cantor." They've gone from
occupying people's neighborhoods to occupying people, targeting those whose
political ideas they disagree with. Now they're trying it again, targeting a Cantor
speech at Northwestern University.

The left likes to express sympathy for resistance to "occupation" in the Middle
East. Shouldn't there now be a resistance against the Occupy Wall Street occupation?
Certainly, if you are unfortunate enough to live near Zuccotti Park, you probably
want to resist the occupation of your neighborhood. Who gave these people the right
to act as if they own public spaces and can harass us and disrupt our lives? No
wonder the Occupy movement is wearing out its welcome in cities across the country.

But perhaps there is a purpose to letting this street theater go on. The spaghetti
Bolognese strikers and all the rest are acting out lessons that the rest of us
learned from reading Atlas Shrugged, and from paying attention to the horrific
20th-century record of socialism. Perhaps they, and the rest of the country, will
learn something from the experience.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sifo
Posted on Friday, November 04, 2011 - 12:06 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Twinkles!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Cityxslicker
Posted on Friday, November 04, 2011 - 12:11 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Communism only works in a society of One, it has always been such, it will always be so.
« Previous Next »

Add Your Message Here
Post:
Bold text Italics Underline Create a hyperlink Insert a clipart image

Username: Posting Information:
This is a public posting area. Enter your username and password if you have an account. Otherwise, enter your full name as your username and leave the password blank. Your e-mail address is optional.
Password:
E-mail:
Options: Post as "Anonymous" (Valid reason required. Abusers will be exposed. If unsure, ask.)
Enable HTML code in message
Automatically activate URLs in message
Action:

Topics | Last Day | Tree View | Search | User List | Help/Instructions | Rules | Program Credits Administration