Let me boil it down for you in the simplest terms. The OWS crowd acts like a bunch of petulant children because they resent those who were willing to do things (i.e. work hard and take calculated risks) which they aren't. With the Tea Party, you have a bunch of people in essentially the same economic class who want to be free to take risks and are concerned that all for which they have worked will dissipate due to out of control and unsustainable Federal spending.
So, does the assessment of "petulant children" seem a bit harsh to you? Consider the following, courtesy of Moe Lane, who shares the story of a Coast Guard member who gets crosswise with some folks currently "Occupying" Boston:
The article notes that “the Coast Guard is warning all staff working on Atlantic Avenue to avoid those protesters while in uniform.” It’s a hell of a thing when you can’t walk the streets of an American city while wearing an uniform and not get harassed by a bunch of ignorant, low-rent mouth-breathers whose courage is directly proportional to their numbers, but I guess that this is the sort of thing that we have to expect from that sort. Particularly since obviously there’s not a chance at all that the Boston city government will do anything about the situation.
So what happened? Well, one of the protesters saw fit to spit on a Coast Guard member:
BOSTON (FOX 25 / MyFoxBoston.com) - The Coast Guard in Boston confirmed that a woman in uniform was harassed and spat upon by Occupy Boston protesters.
The woman was walking to the train and said protesters spit on her twice, called her foul names and even threw a water bottle at her.
It's not yet clear if the protesters were chanting anything about LBJ, although I don't doubt someone is investigating the matter.
Okay, using terms like "petulant children" and "low-rent mouth-breathers" may seem a bit harsh, but seriously, what else can you call it? I continue to believe that a lot of the younger people involved in these protests are unhappy and lashing out because they aren't used to having to live with the consequences of their decisions. If you grow up in a world where you get a participation trophy for everything you do and self-esteem trumps most everything else, it's truly gotta be tough to find out that the world won't just give you money. At some point you have to accept it, though. And we have way too many politicians and media figures around these days who are all too happy to keep people safe in their illusions.
23 comments:
and i always thought my anger was because i didn't get a participation tophy...
the world has changed. these guys occupy vast public places and cause societal disruption... yet, the authorities do nothing.
back in the 80's, all we did was occupy a warehouse, thrash to fast music... and three agencies arrived with riot shields, clubs, dogs and gas.
Time to unleash the hounds...
Time to unleash the hounds...
No, that's exactly the wrong thing to do. I want them to keep talking and talking and talking. I want them to share their incoherent vision and their angst and their reservoirs of self-pity. The world needs to see them.
"I want them to share their incoherent vision and their angst and their reservoirs of self-pity. The world needs to see them."
Are you talking about the Tea Party or OWS? Aren't these "movements" two sides of the same coin? I am a bit surprised by your utter contempt for OWS. They are responding to some of the same issues your beloved tea party focuses on. The notion that income inequality is becoming a big problem in our country; That the financial system and the way we are governed are becoming more and more plutocratic. These seem to me like pretty reasonable complaints. Especially since the rise in income inequality, the diminution of the middle class, and the steady decline in real income has coincided with the steady rise in corporate power and deregulation.
Granted, the targets of the tea party and OWS are very different. The tea baggers are focused on the folks in Washington, while the OWS crowd is going directly to the real source of power: The people who have the folks in Washington on their payroll. (So you could argue that the OWS is aiming their protests at much better targets).
and quite honestly, I have never understood the tea party's complaints about how a government that is allegedly too big caused all the damage. How have big government and overregulation caused the current misery, since, for the last 13 years, we've been paying some lowest tax rates in decades, we've been on a deregulatory path for 31 years, and this financial crisis came on the watch of a very very business-friendly administration?
Lastly, what spontaneous movement isn't inchoate?
Regards,
Rich
Rich,
Inchoate and incoherent are two different things.
My contempt for OWS stems is easy to understand. I've seen this movie before. It's been running nonstop in Madison since February.
As I've mentioned more than a few times, I think the young people who are involved in this protest because of student loan debt levels have a legitimate concern. A lot of recent college graduates are carrying student loan debt loads that are essentially unsustainable. But why is that? If there's a mismatch between their employable skills and their collegiate background, there are usually multiple reasons for it. You can't force a company to hire a liberal arts major.
You personally earn your living by doing things you likely didn't learn in college. And you had to take it on the chin for years to get to where you are now. So did I. It's part of the equation.
If the colleges they attended didn't provide them with the necessary skills to make it in this job market, why is that Wall Street's fault? If the students feel like they got screwed in the process, they should be setting up their tents on the campus green, doncha think?
The way I see it, a lot of young people involved in OWS are just starting to understand that most of what they've been taught, both academically and in their socialization, has little to do with the real world. Every rejection letter from a prospective employer is a reminder of it. But they have a choice -- they can either get with the program and deal with the world as it is, or they can try to petition someone, anyone, to remake the world to something more to their liking. What's more likely to work? You know the answer, Rich.
One other thing -- "corporate power" has no trouble working with the current administration, Rich. Ask Goldman Sachs or GE.
Rich: yes, OWS does have some legitimate complaints. but Wall Street isnt the problem. WS is a transaction headquarters, not a policy making body.
they need to be occupying the the white house, congress and senate, and the federal reserve.
all that education is clearly wasted if they cant tell the difference.
I am going to have disagree with you guys and agree with Rich. I know I will be raked over the coals for this, but from what I have seen I think their requests are legitimate.
One of the guys in my Masters of Teaching (insert your liberal leftist teacher comment here) is participating in the Occupy Portland Protest (insert your liberal leftist Portland comment here) when he has time and has been working with the leaders of the movement and participating in the General Assembly meetings.
They do not believe in violence, they do not approve anarchy, are not against capitalism and they are attempting to make a coherent and working message for the protest in the long run.
Here is the website: http://occupyportland.org/
Read it, enjoy and I will get ready for the conservative firestorm!
The tea baggers.....
Stay classy Rich, you feeble-minded jackwagon.
Sorry, Mark. I try to be civil but there are certain things for which I have zero tolerance. Leftist jerks who attribute that vulgar reference to the tea party is high on that list.
Brad, here is former founder of the Tea Party commenting on the Occupy Wall Street movement. http://rt.com/usa/news/tea-occupy-denninger-wall-819/
your saying that a bunch of lefty hippie wierdos are occupying portland and think they're gonna change the world???
so, where is the news in that?
CB,
I watched the clip. I think that RT.com is radically overstating the importance of one individual to the Tea Party movement. And to assume that any one individual speaks for the entirety of the Tea Party movement is specious.
I've made this point before and will do so again -- the Tea Party movement is on the Cincinnatus model; in the main, the people that I know who have been involved in the protests are folks who go when they can, because their primary focus is their own lives. They aren't asking the government to give them specific advantages as much as to stop interfering in their lives.
I don't doubt that many people in the Occupy movement are sincere. Sincerity isn't the issue. My view is that they aren't thinking things through. In the post I referenced, Brad included a line from the Iowahawk that sums matters up well:
Lemme get this straight. A bank lent you $100k that you handed to a college for a worthless degree, and now you're mad at... the bank?
For a lot of folks, especially the ones in the movement who are calling for a "free" education (by which they mean you and I should pay for it), that's the issue. They've gotten screwed and now they are angry. But they have chosen the wrong targets.
Brad, I decided to let Rich's comment pass this time, but I'm glad you called attention to it.
CB,
Here's something from Occupy Portland for your enjoyment:
Keepin' it classy
CB,
Here's a link directly from the horse's mouth:
Tea Party, Go Screw Yourself
So what is the point of all these comments?
1) Karl Denninger can claim whatever he wants, but he doesn't speak for the Tea Party movement.
2) There are several groups that claim to speak for the Tea Party, but that doesn't mean they do, either. It's a lot more complicated than that.
If you do a Google search, nearly all the references to this guy being a Tea Party founder are on left-wing blog sites, which are echoing each other.
Also, you should know that RT.com is Russia Today.
Context matters, CB.
Gino, thank you for your right-wing comment as it was done on cue. So thank you for not letting me down!
Marcus, Thank you for your comments as I appreciate what you said. I did not know that RT stood for Russia Today!
However, regarding context, I do take exception to you pulling out the videos from Occupy Portland without showing some of the other more positive aspects of the movement. By showing the ones you did, I do not think you showed their true colors.
So here are a couple more: http://occupypdx.org/2011/10/16/general-assembly-condensed-notes-10-15-2011/
http://occupypdx.org/2011/10/16/discharge-debt-rally-oct-17th-12-noon/
CB,
Never claimed it was their true colors. But it is part of the overall palette.
I've been watching this stuff all year long. This is Madison writ large and frankly I find it all tiresome. And I tend to judge things not by their intentions, but by their results.
Can you tell me what the endgame is for OWS, or Occupy anything?
Mark, Here is a great place to start about what the goals of the Occupy Movement are about: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_Wall_Street
It appears their main point is this: The participants are mainly protesting social and economic inequality, corporate greed, as well as the power and influence of corporations, particularly from the financial service sector, and lobbyists over government.
My main feeling is let's see where it goes. If it is stupid, it will die. If it has legs then like the anti-war movement it will become more defined and better focused.
They are not perfect and yes, they maybe idealistic, but that does not necessarily make them incorrect about the issues they are talking about. Are the youn'uns going about it the right way? Maybe and maybe not, but I am not ready to shut them down just yet.
It appears their main point is this: The participants are mainly protesting social and economic inequality, corporate greed, as well as the power and influence of corporations, particularly from the financial service sector, and lobbyists over government.
CB, in every society, everywhere, throughout human history, there has been social and economic inequality. In any society these folks could envision, there would be the same thing.
What drives corporate greed? Well, the desire of a corporation, especially a publicly held one, to provide a return on investment. Who benefits from that? Anyone who owns a stake in the corporation. And that includes you and me. And most of the folks protesting.
Why do corporations have lobbyists? Because they are trying to make money. Do they attempt to gain the system? Of course they do -- it's a very human tendency and one that the OWS people are attempting to do as well.
This thing is stupid because it bubbles up from the same belief that all mush-headed idealists have always had; if only we could stop the "bad people" from doing bad things, everything would be better. It won't happen -- can't happen -- because we are all sinners and the only way you can get compliance for your dreams is through coercion.
Recent human history is strewn with the body counts of supposedly idealistic movements that turned on their supporters when things didn't turn out the way they thought it would. There's no reason whatsoever to assume that these people are any more noble or understanding than any of their forbears.
Are the youn'uns going about it the right way? Maybe and maybe not, but I am not ready to shut them down just yet.
Who's calling to shut them down? I'm just pointing out what should be evident -- this is a very old story. Do you want to know how old, CB? Check out this video from 1979:
Same old, same old
I don't have the time to write anything more as I am writing papers for school, but I will just say I humbly disagree.
One last thing and then I'll leave this alone.
If these folks were sincere about making the world a better place, they'd spend less time petitioning someone, anyone to redress their grievances. Instead, they could go out into the community and do something productive. Why aren't they out volunteering in the community? They could take meals to the elderly. They could clean up trash on the highway. They could volunteer to help at-risk youth. They could join the Peace Corps, or go overseas and teach English -- that's a job that would earn them money and give them an opportunity to learn about the world.
There are dozens of activities that the OWS people could undertake that would be more useful and would provide them with a better understanding of the world than sitting around in a public space and demonstrating. If they want to make the world a better and more just place, there's ample work to be done. They should go out and do it.
Good luck with your papers, CB.
Post a Comment