Attack of the Ninnies

Well, it looks like some of the OWSers have decided to try to go all badass with riots (though some report that OWSers are also trying to oppose the rioter). If they don’t get this under control, they lose me. MLK had it right. You win hearts with nonviolence. You just prove you are an impatient ninny when you start trashing churches and throwing molotov cocktails.

Update:  I’m not so certain that the doofuses who are rioting represent anything like the majority of this amorphous movement.  Colbert has fun highlighting the cringeworthy silliness that seems to dominate much of what happens there, but if this really does typify a typical OWSer then I hardly think the Beckian take on it as something that is just about to erupt into Bolshevik Revolution is justified:

Does the violence need to be stopped (by force, if necessary)? Yes. But the OWSers still have a point about the grave economic inequities we face and they still seem (if these two silly people are any indication) largely rather harmless. Are there some violent kooks among them? Sure. There are violent kooks among the Tea Party types too, showing up at political rallies with guns and blathering about “second amendment solutions” if Sharon Angle lost an election. Doesn’t mean the Tea Parties are utterly wrong. Nor are the OWSers.

The main problem with ninnies like the people in this video is that they are powerless, by their insufferable PCness, to stand up to the violent kooks who will try to co-opt them and who won’t give a rat’s patoot about their twinkles process. I hope they can man up and oppose such goons or they will find all their idealism pulled out from under them.

  • Chad myers

    At what point was the OWS ever about anything more than just anarchism and an excuse for a bunch of crazies to get out and spout their various causes?

    I mean, if they had a leader and were organized and had a noble goal, I would support them, but it’s always been just above a surly brawl and now it’s turned into a surly brawl and all it does is make the bankers look better and the complainers like morons.

    Now if you say anything bad about banks people say, “Oh, you’re one of those OWS morons, right?” *throws hands up*

    • Mark Shea

      I disagree. The fact that a lot of people correctly recognize that Something is Deeply Wrong and can see that extremely wealthy and powerful interests are looting the economy, yet cannot get organized, does not mean they are wrong about the fact that Something is Deeply Wrong and that extremely wealthy and powerful interests are looting the economy. It just means they are weak and disorganized. It is the deepest wish of the rich and powerful looters that we all conclude “Nothing to see here. Just a bunch of crazies.” But this won’t be going away because the problem is real and will only get worse. Rome isn’t concerned for nothing.

      • The Deuce

        I agree that a lot of people in OWS have legitimate complaints, and some of them even understand the right solutions. But I agree with Chad that as a whole this movement is making it easier for the rich and powerful looters to say “Nothing to see here but crazies” any time anyone points out the unlawful looting of politically connected banks.

        I think that portion of OWS that aren’t PC-whipped ninnies with no actual ideas on the one hand, and Leftists intent on smashing the system on the other, need to do a better job of distinguishing themselves from the anarchists. Maybe they’re trying to create an illusion of unity, but it doesn’t help them at all to be lumped in with a bunch of violent and entitled revolutionaries under the same label as part of the same movement.

      • Marthe Lépine

        And why did it take so long for the violence to start? Here in my country we have had at least one documented case of police wearing disguises to infiltrate a demonstration and start throwing rocks… Although said demonstration would otherwise most probably have remained peaceful… If OWS has managed to remain mostly peaceful for a few weeks now, this is already to their credit. And maybe, just maybe, there are some authorities getting impatient and trying to speed things up… I could add more but I do not know how far I can go with political in-correctedness when commenting on a country other than my own.

      • http://chicagoboyz.net TMLutas

        The mechanism that the upper class looters is not people driving up to the back of Fort Knox and driving off with the gold. It is expanding government power so that it can be used to tilt the economic playing field in the looter’s favor and buying the regulators so that those that are “in” suffer the least from government power and are first in line for the government goodies. They are active in such a wide variety of ways that our oversight mechanisms are overwhelmed.

        The point in the scheme that is most vulnerable to disruption is the first point. Shrinking government power, moving to private provision of services wherever possible, shrinks the playing field where the upper class looters can function and gives our limited oversight abilities a fighting chance to clean the mess up.

        But that’s a tea party solution and very much anathema to OWS. OWS, so far as I can tell, divides its solutions between those that are irrelevant and those that actually make the problem worse.

  • Paulus Magnus

    Looks like the normal run of protests up in the Bay Area to be honest. News down here was that the violence was done by some obvious anarchists upon whom the protestors themselves turned.

    As for winning with nonviolence, that may have worked for MLK, but it certainly didn’t for 99% of major revolutions (and most certainly not for the American).

    • Mark Shea

      I hope you are right. I think the OWSers will have to police themselves carefully lest the nuts who just want a riot poison what they are trying to do.

  • http://7kids6dice1gamerdad.wordpress.com Raul

    Oh, come on. I saw this coming miles away. There may be some in the OWS movement whose motives were pure, however, this overall movement was one based on inciting a rebellion and encouraging violence as a means to bring it about, a rage against the system, so to speak. I am not at all surprised at this turn of events.

    • Mark Shea

      Overall, I think the movement has been largely peaceful and, more important, that it has a point just as the Tea Partiers do. Both have a healthy loathing for the concentration of power in the hands of a few. For Tea Partiers, the few is the State. For OWSers, it’s big business. Both have their fringes (Nuts who show up with guns at political rallies/rioters, anarchists, Commies, Nazis). But I’m not at all persuaded this is the “overall” makeup of the thing.

      • http://7kids6dice1gamerdad.wordpress.com Raul

        If I am not mistaken, I believe that Chesterton was also a gun owner. Was he a nut?

        • Mark Shea

          Why do you think I regard gun owners as nuts? Did you start thinking this before or after you stopped beating your wife?

          • http://7kids6dice1gamerdad.wordpress.com Raul

            The implication seemed to be there. My apologies if I have misunderstood.

      • Rosemarie

        +J.M.J+

        I’m not sure how we could judge “overall” peacefulness of the OWS movement. At least one person online is cataloging all the lawlessness that has been occurring at various protest sites, as reported in the media:

        http://biggovernment.com/jjmnolte/2011/10/28/occupywallstreet-the-rap-sheet-so-far/

        Now, I’m sure the Tea Party wasn’t perfect and had its own extremists. Yet, correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t remember Tea Partiers engaging in vandalism, drug abuse, rape, public urination and defecation, public masturbation, attacking the police, US flag desecration, etc. Unless they worked up a similar “rap sheet” at their various gatherings, I just don’t see equivalency between the two groups.

        • Mark Shea

          Probably just as well, because talking of “equivalency” is meaningless. There are, however, similarities.

          • Rosemarie

            +J.M.J+

            Surface similarities can often mask deeper differences.

      • http://chicagoboyz.net TMLutas

        You seem to assume that tea party is big business friendly. I’m guessing not so much in reality. Corporate welfare is not something that the tea party people support in my experience.

  • Tim

    One of the worst tragedies of OWS (aside from all the violence and crime) is the shift of the hipster population from the outskirts of college campuses to inner city sidewalks.

    I thought I escaped them when I was graduated from college, but they are following me.

  • drogah

    The reason this is not surprising in the least is based on makeup. You get a bunch of hippie Marxist kids together, throw in the hipsters, the hired protesters, and the usual fools who make up global summit protests, and this is exactly what happens.

    The simple fact of the matter is that this protest was just too “out there” from the start, to draw in normal folks. The Tea Party appeals to mom and pop, but the roots of OWS — with all its classist rhetoric — just doesn’t play in the mainstream.

    Bottom line: these ninnies, being high on emotion and very, very low on the intellect, were bound to go out with an emotion-fueled bang. It’s getting cold, you know, and emotions are hard to fuel through chattering teeth.

    • Joseph

      Tea Party appeals to Calvinists (righteous envy). OWS appeals to atheists (righteous envy). Both aim their disdain at those who have the power, both financial and political, but both are, unfortunately, driven by envy at the core. They don’t want the injustice stopped, they want the power for themselves… much like the French revolutionaries.

    • Marthe Lépine

      Funny, but I seem to have read in other places about, for example, some elderly retired folks in New York coming to show their support; and what was that injured veteran in Oakland doing there? Trying to repress the “anarchy”? It seems, too, from some reports, that there are other veterans involved… Of course, opponents (particularly if they benefit from the status quo) will be trying to paint the whole OWS crowd with the same brush to make them look bad, THAT was to be expected.

  • The Deuce

    *sigh* Ninnies and violent insurrectionists… and not a grownup in sight.

    Btw, while the violent rioters may not represent the majority of the movement, even the more outwardly peaceful daytime protest in Oakland was actually aimed not just at going on strike (a right shared by all citizens) but at forcibly shutting down the Oakland port by blocking access to it – something that they succeeded in doing. It’s not clear to me how that’s supposed to bring justice only or even primarily to the “1%”.

  • Peggy R

    I think the equivalency to whatever tea party “kooks” there may be is inappropriate. I’ve been to several tea party activities. I actually haven’t seen one kook or dangerous radical. In any case, the “dangerous” or “Kook” might be one or two people at an event. There’s been no violence at tea parties. They are not mobs. The tea party crowd is made up mostly of families and retirees. And they go home at night. They go to jobs. They raise their kids. The quantity of kooks and dangerous individuals is far greater and more dangerous amongst the OWS kiddies. The OWS crowds include idealists, malcontents, spoiled brats, anarchists, marxists, drug addicts, and rapists. That’s not the tea party crowd or any tea party individual.

    • Mark Shea

      I’m not particularly persuaded that most OWS gatherings are “mobs” (see the Colbert video: whatever those two and their group of consensus builders are, its not a mob). And I’m not especially convinced that Tea Partiers aren’t dangerous radicals. It’s just that they don’t believe in street fighting. But plenty of Tea Partiers were mad for the dangerous and radical idea of electing a gold-digging quitter like Sarah Palin to be leader of the Free World. There are more forms of radicalism than just chucking molotov cocktails. Happily, Palin herself was only in it for the money and fame and never had any intention of exposing herself to the rigors of trying to be President.

      • Peggy R

        I’m not debating Sarah Palin here. Though, I do not champion her, I don’t see her as “dangerous” or “radical.” (I think the nation could do worse than her.) The tea party is bigger than her, though she became its most visible advocate. The tea party is the people, not her. Whatever violence may have been in some tea partyer’s mind, it has not been carried out in any way. The tea party has not sought to destroy society and disrupt economic and social activity or public safety in their midst. While there are similar concerns between the tea party and OWS crowds, they are not the same. They are not equally “radical” or “dangerous” to the United States. Cheers.

        • http://7kids6dice1gamerdad.wordpress.com Raul

          +1 to that, Peggy. I simply am having a hard time with Mark’s attempt to find equivalence between the two groups. If there is any parallel to be drawn it is this. These so-called ‘Ninnies’ to me can be classified the same as the so-called ‘Useful Idiots’ of times in our recent past, globally speaking.

          • Mark Shea

            No quarrel that a lot of OWSers are useful idiots. Not so sure that this makes the movement the seedbed of a second Bolshevik movement.

            • http://7kids6dice1gamerdad.wordpress.com Raul

              That remains to be seen.

            • Joseph

              Who knows. If they had a charismatic leader with a plan… maybe. Pothead college kids fantasize about Bolshevism and the like. How many ‘hammer & sickle’, Lenin, and Che Guevara t-shirts do you see on any given day at any given college campus? If a Lenin were to rise up, how many of those mindless boobs would march forward with lips pursed focused on the rear-end of their glorious leader.

              That being said, I think that this fate may be too late for the OWS movement. They’ve been too long without their Lenin or without an overall plan. So, they’re too fragmented to think collectively any longer. Pot doesn’t help with collective thinking, motivation, or ambition anyway.

      • http://chicagoboyz.net TMLutas

        You’re quite wrong that the tea partiers don’t believe in street fighting. They just don’t believe in street fighting while we still have a republic. If the government were to cancel a national election, the switch would immediately flip. I do not expect the government to cancel a national election. I expect that the switch is not going to flip. The establishment of gun ownership as an individual right made overt tyranny advocacy too personally dangerous. Mr. Gura and Mr. Heller did a great service for peace.

        • Rosemarie

          +J.M.J+

          Though I doubt a “Second American Revolution” would be at all successful. As I said once on the previous blog a year or so ago, it would just be a handful of Ruby Ridge and Waco-style incidents scattered around the country, which the ATF and National Guard would probably handily defeat without any recourse to the major armed forces.

  • SKay

    Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac recently payed millions in bonous money to their executives. Given that FM and FMac are a big part of the housing problem–and they still owe the taxpayers millions–you might think OWS might want to demonstrate in front of these organizations or in front of the White House for the millions of wasted taxpayer dollars used to prop up businesses like the now bankrupt Solyndra — whose owner raised money for Obama’s campaign.
    When you see a list of the groups who are supporting OWS -you realize what it is really all about. As Van Jones (worked in the Obama adm.) said in a video that I saw –”Top down-bottom up -inside out.” That is the goal in order to “change” America. He now works for People for the American Way–one of the first groups who backed OWS along with Move On.org-two Soros backed organizations.

    • Mark Shea

      Right. Got the one-sided narrative. Only the concentration of power in the hands of the state is bad. Concentration of power in the hands of big business is good. Everyone direct their attention solely to the state. Stop being mean to rich and powerful businessmen. Only complain about rich and powerful pols–if they are Dems.

      Me: I think the Tea parties *and* OWS both have a point–and are both clueless about what to do about it.

      • http://7kids6dice1gamerdad.wordpress.com Raul

        Sure they have a point. For the Tea Partiers, it is often a finger pointing heavenward. For the OWS’r, its a bayonet and its’ pointing at you, the rich American.

        Just sayin’…

        • Mark Shea

          Do you have any evidence for this? The spectacle of bayonet wielding street fighters has been fairly scarce on the ground.

        • Mark Shea

          For the Tea Partiers, it has typically been a dogged enthusiasm for our Wars of Empire abroad, coupled with a confused insistence on entitlements (“Keep your government hands off my Medicare!”) and a demand for miraculous cuts in taxes while still demanding the goodies and the wars and the empire. That the bayonet is pointed at foreigners is not really that much help. Both groups seem very confused. Both are not entirely wrong.

          • Peggy R

            I suspect that the military adventures are primarily the dreams of the GOP establishment. Note the broad public support for leaving Iraq. But, yes, the oldsters still want their social security. Recall, the tea party has been a thorn in the side of the GOP establishment, which pays lip service.

            • Mark Shea

              I’m afraid I have missed the massive anti-war movement at the Tea Parties. Mostly what I’ve seen has been reflexive support for Bush’s military adventures and even a lack of spine against Obama’s. I know the GOP pays lip service, but the Tea Parties have let themselves be played too. Not all the useful idiots are OWSers. Consider the embarrassing spectacle of the FOXNEWS manufactured Glen Beck rally, in which Christians worshipped somebody or other, possibly even God (though it was never quite clear) in order to get on board with the real agenda: national pride, wars abroad, and money at home. I think that’s just as dangerous as the woolly-mindedness of the OWSers and has arguably done far more damage to the country as those people stood staunchly by Bush/Cheney for 8 solid years when it came to their most disastrous policies. Of course, i realize there is huge diversity with TPs as well as OWSers. Not a few are Ron Paul guys who have been vocal against Empire and entitlements. But lots have been complete suckers for clever manipulators, just like lots of OWSers have been.

              • Peggy R

                The tea party is about the size of government. There was no position on the wars expressed either way. Heck, some tea party folks didn’t even want to touch social issues as they might dilute the unity on spending. The anti-tax sentiment seeks that taxes not rise so that spending is curtailed…but alas, the ruling class has no courage to cut spending; they borrow more.

                The Beck thing was very weird. I peeked at it on the tele. I wonder if people knew what they were going to. That was Beck as Messiah, I think.

                • http://7kids6dice1gamerdad.wordpress.com Raul

                  Again, +1 to that. It was/is about the size of government, or at least that was the primary focus. It logically and naturally follows, at least to me, that if the size of government is reduced so will the size of the military, i.e. reduction of deployment overseas.

            • http://7kids6dice1gamerdad.wordpress.com Raul

              +1 to that. I do not see at least here in my local circle of conservative friends and associates where there is widespread support for foreign wars. So, to me, that is a bogus charge levelled at the Tea Party. With respect to the ‘bayonet’, I was playing metaphorical based on the outbreak of violence during these protests as opposed to the lack thereof during the Tea Party protests.

              • Mark Shea

                Did you live through the years 2002-2008? Some of us remember when opposing the Iraq war was to hate America and desire the death of babies. We weren’t being told that by lefties. We were told that by righties (including tea partiers) who wanted vague spending cuts but who had no beef at all withour massive military and wars of empire.

                • http://7kids6dice1gamerdad.wordpress.com Raul

                  Of course, I was there. The trouble is, the Tea Party movement began shortly after our God King was elected. That we had neo-cons supporting the wars abroad was absolutely regrettable, however, I see no such support amongst my local friends and supporters of the Tea Party.

                • Peggy R

                  Mark. Tea partiers are rank and file citizens, not elected officials–certainly not pre-2010. Obviously, enough of the public was opposed to the wars by 07 or 08 to support Obama over McVain who was ready to stay for a century. [Arguably, the Dems winning in 06 may have been anti-Iraq too...Rumsfeld was axed soon after.] I’m sure that affected a few votes out there. I’d have to agree w/Raul that probably if one wants a smaller govt, one might think military activities should be cut as well. Cheers.

      • sbark

        I think that the biggest problem in the concentration of power in big business has been with the interrelationship between government and big business. The biggest issues in the economy have been within the industries that are most highly regulated. Often the point of much of the regulation is to reduce competition from anyone without the political connections.

        • Peggy R

          Yep…I add words b/c the filter wants them….

      • Joseph

        Mark,

        I totally agree with you: Tea Party – Calvinist righteous envy; OWS – atheist righteous envy… envy nevertheless.

        • carlamariee

          disagree, OWS isn’t about envy, it’s about having a level playing field and fighting chance to get your own on your own.

  • http://deleted Dave G.

    Well, it’s not news. This has been happening here and there for some time. Does it mean the whole ‘movement’ is this way? No. I’m not sure this whole movement is anything right now. I just saw that a collection of OWSers were arrested, and it turned out their average standard of living was far higher than most of us 99% types. Of course they have a point. Anyone can point to a broken world and say it’s broken. How hard is that. At least the Tea Party had a solution. Had a plan. Despite being rather fuzzy at first, it eventually came up with some form of movement. Maybe OWS will, too. But what it will look like is still up in the air.

    As for where to focus, that probably says a lot about us based on what we want to focus on. There was a whole hubbub about police going overboard recently, even though that no doubt represents a minority of police in our country. Likewise, in the day, 97% of coverage of the Tea Party had to do with those ‘fringe loons.’ If that’s the case, then we should spend most of our time focused on those who are in this whole OWS movement who represent the worst. If we don’t, while we did with other groups or movements, it’s worth asking why.

  • The Deuce

    Btw, I don’t think the crazies in the two movements are really comparable. The Tea Party had a guy show up at a town hall in Texas (where carrying guns isn’t exactly rare) that he was legally entitled to carry, and it was argued that he was trying to intimidate people, which he might have been. Here we’ve got a large enough group of anarchists to wreak a fair amount of destruction.

    Also, while I don’t think the majority of OWS is violent, we nevertheless have to consider why it happened. The Tea Party never provoked riots, and it would have been quite surprising if it had. Nobody is really surprised that a significant number of OWSer have started engaging in anarchist riots, on the other hand. Instead, people are just saying “Well, this doesn’t represent the majority of them.” Clearly something in the ideological makeup of OWS makes them more conducive to this sort of unlawful chaos, and everybody knows it.

  • Andy

    A couple of interesting tidbits – in a recent poll only 19% of Americans disagreed with OWS – so much for not appealing toe mom and pop – lots of mom and pops in the remaining 81%. The Tea Party became a movement because of a certain set of Brothers, Dick Armey and his movement and most important FOX News. Looking at the results of the Tea movement with their members of the House and Senate getting money for their home districts, voting against the needs of the country, everything they said they wouldn’t do. I hope that OWS does not become a movement.
    Unfortunately, the Tea Party and OWS see a problem that our Corporate Overlords and their loyal slaves the politicians don’t want to change – neither group really knows what to do about the problem – but it is real.
    Just as I don’t think the 2cd amendment crowd of the Tea Party represents the entire party i don’t think that the crazies in Oakland represent the OWS movement. It is sad that what sells as news is controversy and not true reporting.
    As a solution lets not let political leaders or corporate overlords make more than the median income of the country. That might move a few people to either get out of the system or try to change it for the better. But that change will not last long until there a return to Christian/Catholic values.

    • http://7kids6dice1gamerdad.wordpress.com Raul

      I am having a hard time understanding this opposition to the 2nd amendment. Both groups and all Americans should be supporting this as a fundamental right. If one supports this amendment then that one is to be deemed a ‘nut’? It doesn’t add up for me.

      • Mark Shea

        One is a nut to speak of “second amendment solutions” to an election (i.e. shooting the winner of an election if an election does not go one’s way).

        • http://7kids6dice1gamerdad.wordpress.com Raul

          The difference is that certain members of the right-leaning Tea Party might talk it up, however, in reality it is those on the left who actually carry that sort of activity out, cf. Giffords.
          Be that as it may, Andy made no such reference to what you have alleged. If that sort of thing has occured from those on the right, then naturally I agree with you that something was sorely wrong with the perpetrator. But let us not find fault with the 2nd amendment or with those who openly advocate it as Americans.

          • Mark Shea

            Giffords was shot by a lunatic. It was despicable of the Left to try to pin it on the right. Don’t make the same mistake and try to pin it on the Left.

            Where did I find fault with the 2nd Amendment?

            • http://7kids6dice1gamerdad.wordpress.com Raul

              Okay, a looney leftist. Or a lunatic with leftist ideas and sympathies. If it walks like a duck…

              My beef with your ’2nd amendment’ phrasing was associating it with lunacy. It seemed to me that support of the amendment was seen with disdain here. My apologies if that was not the case.

              • Mark Shea

                The language about “second amendment remedies” was not mine. It was Sharon Angle’s. She’s the one who made gun owners look terrible by talking about the possibility of “second amendment remedies” should she lose an election. Nothing against the second amendment, but that’s crazy talk. It was a thinly veiled hint that somebody should shoot Harry Reid if he won the election.

                • http://7kids6dice1gamerdad.wordpress.com Raul

                  Oh, hell. She is a politician and most I wouldn’t trust as far as I could throw. They all say the darnedest things and I certainly don’t advocate such talk, however, as Americans we have politicians who have had a history of this sort of thing. Andrew Jackson, for instance, wouldn’t have just talked about it. He probably would have shot his opponent.

                • Andy

                  Actually MArk the 2cd Amendment response also came from Beck, Hannity, the usual gang at Fox, from the guy who lost to Cuomo in NYS, – it wasn’t just one person. That is unfortunate.

              • Andy

                A loony leftist and your proof – the wild accusations about people who we disagree with seems to be the hallmark of those who want to continue with corporate overlordship. As to walking like a duck you must be one of those blames everything that is wrong on the other people because they are not like me. That is the real sadness for those on the right part of the spectrum of political beliefs.

                • http://7kids6dice1gamerdad.wordpress.com Raul

                  Interesting coming from someone who doesn’t know a thing about me, however, we know quite a bit about Gifford’s shooter.

                  • Andy

                    What we know about Gifford’s shooter is that he is crazy. I do not think youknow any more about him than that.

    • Rosemarie

      +J.M.J+

      Since the matter of public opinion polls came up, the latest Quinnipiac poll shows that:

      “By a 39 – 30 percent margin, American voters have an unfavorable opinion of the Occupy Wall Street movement, with 30 percent who don’t know enough about it for an opinion. ”

      from: http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1295.xml?ReleaseID=1670

      The unfavorable side is rising.

  • http://www.brutallyhonest.org Rick

    Hi Mark,

    Trying to see (and perhaps I’ve missed it) how your link to the guy who flew a Cessna into a building is tied to the Tea Party as you’ve implied… if there’s no tie (and again, I’ll allow that I’m simply missed it), then I think your linkage to the Tea Party is off base…

    • Tim

      There wasn’t any.

      But the “pilot” was an amateur musician, so at least we now have evidence that musicians, as a group, are violent.

    • Rosemarie

      +J.M.J+

      There is no evidence that Andrew Joseph Stack III was associated with the Tea Party. Granted, opponents of that movement were quick to try to make that association before any facts were known (much as they would later attempt with Jared Lee Loughner, the Tuscon shooter). Yet Stack’s manifesto later revealed that he hated capitalism and big corporations. Hardly a typical Tea Party attitude; in fact he was ironically closer to many OWS protesters in that regard. Though overall, his personal views didn’t fall squarely into the ideology of either group.

      • Zach Foreman

        Mark’s “tu quoque” moral equivocation response might work, except, as you pointed out, his Tea Party is violent example didn’t support his contention. Here are some quotes from the pilot’s suicide note. The readers can decide for themselves if it sounds more like Occupy Wall Street or the Tea Party:
        “The communist creed: From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.
        The capitalist creed: From each according to his gullibility, to each according to his greed.”
        and
        “However, this is where I learned that there are two “interpretations” for every law; one for the very rich, and one for the rest of us…”
        and
        “I decided that I didn’t trust big business to take care of me, and that I would take responsibility for my own future and myself.”
        “they [the rich] just steal from the middle class (who doesn’t have any say in it, elections are a joke) to cover their asses and it’s “business-as-usual”. Now when the wealthy fuck up, the poor get to die for the mistakes… isn’t that a clever, tidy solution.”
        and
        “The recent presidential puppet GW Bush and his cronies in their eight years ”
        Reading the suicide note reminds me of this blog: elections are rigged and my vote doesn’t matter, check. Candidates are just puppets of the rich. Check. The rich live by one set of rules the rest by another. Check.
        http://www.webcitation.org/5ndnnvvrP

        • Rosemarie

          +J.M.J+

          Yep, those quotes are much more OWS than Tea Party. Though his opposition to taxes and the IRS are, arguably, the other way around. Just goes to show Stack didn’t belong to either group and so should not be associated with the Tea Party.

  • Will

    Well, for the last forty years I have been trying to get the lefties to admit that there was something wrong when I was beaten up by “anti-war protesters”, and their reply, over and over, is to sneer and tell me to my face that IT DIDN’T HAPPEN.

    Sorry, I have as much concern for the lefties as they had for me.

    • http://7kids6dice1gamerdad.wordpress.com Raul

      It seems that is what is happening to the alleged rape victims as well…

  • Arnold

    I was a bit surprised to read that the OWSers were about to “lose” you. I didn’t know they “had” you.

    • Mark Shea

      I thought I had made pretty clear that I sympathize with their complaint that our economic system is radically unjust and getting worse. I generally sympathize with the weak versus the colossally powerful.

      • Peggy R

        Maybe some of the OWSers are “weak” in relation to their parents’ control over their trust funds. Daily Caller surveyed the given addresses for several OWS arrestees in NY. Nice digs…their parents’ of course.

  • julian

    i so badly want to root for these kids, but why do they have to be so…weird…dumb…and freakishly cult-like?

    • http://deleted Dave G.

      See, I don’t. How many times here and in other places have we lamented this ‘turn it over to the youth and inexperienced’ narrative of the last 40 years? After all, last time the youth of America came together to protest the corruption of our country, what did it get us? Closer to God? A more Catholic Nation? As has been said before, fool me once with the ‘turn it over to the youth of our nation’, shame on you. Fool me twice? I don’t think so.

      • Rosemarie

        +J.M.J+

        Exactly, Dave G.

  • Rosemarie

    +J.M.J+

    I can’t be sanguine about OWS. Little-known fact: the domain name of their website, occupywallstreet.org, was registered back in June 2011, three months before the first protest began in NYC. Here’s the WHOIS domain registration so you can see for yourself:

    http://www.networksolutions.com/whois-search/occupywallstreet.org

    Note that the registrant is Kalle Lasn, the founder of Adbusters. Here’s a description of that group from its website:

    “We are a global network of artists, activists, writers, pranksters, students, educators and entrepreneurs who want to advance the new social activist movement of the information age. Our aim is to topple existing power structures and forge a major shift in the way we will live in the 21st century.” (http://www.adbusters.org/about/adbusters)

    OWS was not some spontaneous grassroots movement. It was planned and orchestrated by a radical group that wants to “topple existing power structures.” Though the news media (including Foxnews) seems silent on it, the origin of OWS is something of an open secret. Lasn admits to starting it in this article:

    http://thetyee.ca/News/2011/10/07/Kalle-Lasn-Occupy-Wall-Street/

    I’m sure there are well-meaning people at these protests who don’t want to destroy capitalism, but they are probably unaware that that was the purpose of the movement from the start. While I don’t like laissez-faire capitalism (distributism would be much better), I also don’t like anarchy, socialism or communism, which many protesters are advocating. Sorry, this is not just another version of the Tea Party (which I was never part of and don’t agree with totally, either). There is something much more sinister going on behind the scenes.

    • Mark Shea

      I don’t see that “toppling existing power structures” means “destroying capitalism”. It’s rather wooly language. As to the fact that somebody is organizing it, I guess my question is, “so what?” Basically this tells me what I already know: that the OWSers recognize there is something seriously wrong with our current economic system, want to change it, and have no clear plan for that. In that, they remind me of the Tea Parties, which also had organizing powers behind them, a real grievance, and no clear plan.

      • Rosemarie

        +J.M.J+

        The media has been saying all along that no one seems to be organizing/leading it and that the protesters don’t have a single, coherent message. The fact is, the movement does have organizers behind the scenes and their plans are for revolution. The last article I linked to mentions that anarchists were behind OWS from the very start.

        Perhaps the fact that their language is “wooly” and their plan is unclear will be to their ultimate disadvantage. I hope so. I pray that is the case. Corporate greed should be reined in but communism or anarchy is not the way to do it. though even if their “revolution” fails in the end, they can do a lot of damage along the way in the form of riots, more burdens on the taxpayers to foot the bill for police overtime, etc.

        IMHO, OWS is doing more harm than tangible good at this point. I don’t see how “the 1%” are suffering from these protests at all, but many in “the 99%” are, including some of the protesters.

        • Andy

          I do not see in the OWS concerns communism. I see a set of citizens who see serious problems in our country and are trying to call attention to them and “do something about them”.

          • Rosemarie

            +J.M.J+

            Interviewers who went to the rallies asked participants what they wanted to achieve, and many of them said it was communism or socialism. Also, communist pamphlets have been given out at these sites and avowed communists like Van Jones have been invited to speak. So there certainly is a strong communist element to the protest.

            • Andy

              Would the interviewers be James O’Keefe and his oh so honest colleagues? There were also Tea Partiers who wanted to embrace Hitler’s beliefs. Crazy people are everywhere in every group.
              Pamphlets were given to me at a Tea Party rally calling for the abolition of the Federal Government – raging anarchists. The problem is that we can find lunatics all over – look at the message of the group and not the selected messages to sell advertising.

              • Rosemarie

                +J.M.J+

                No, the interviewers were members of the press. AFAIK, O’Keefe hasn’t done any stunts relating to this movement.

                • Andy

                  Actually O’Keefe has tried to pull one of his stunts.

                  • Rosemarie

                    +J.M.J+

                    Well this is the first I’m hearing of it. Not that I care about whatever he does, anyway.

        • Marthe Lépine

          How come that in your country, the minute anybody suggests that there is something wrong with capitalism, howls are going up about communism, revolution and anarchy? The Cold war has been over for a long time. When people get so easily on the defensive the moment anyone tries to say that something is really wrong with the system as it is now, could mean that they know they are guilty of something, and they do not want ANY change because they might lose their grasp on the advantages?

          • Rosemarie

            +J.M.J+

            If the same people criticizing capitalism are also promoting communism, revolution and anarchy, I don’t think that it’s unreasonable to point that out. As I’ve said before, capitalism isn’t perfect and has its problems but socialism isn’t the cure for capitalism’s ills.

            Yes, the Cold War has been over for a long time, but there are still people out there who espouse communism. Many of these kids grew up after the Cold War ended, anyway. They’re probably not too aware of history beyond what their radical professors are filling their minds with in class.

      • S. Murphy

        I’m getting a vision of a Dodge Dakota with a ‘subvert the Dominant Paradigm’ sticker…

      • http://chicagoboyz.net TMLutas

        You really should do a bit of research about adbusters. It’s fairly open about its anticapitalism.

        • Rosemarie

          +J.M.J+

          Thank you, TMLutas. I’ve been trying to expose the true radicalism behind this movement, which I have been watching for at least a month now. I’m providing links to media reports to verify my statements to show I’m not making all this up or engaging in irrational paranoia. Yet for some reason, some in this combox prefer to keep their heads in the sand and just play the “tu quoque” game with the Tea Party.

          I was never involved in the latter so I don’t feel personally wounded by that game, but it is frustrating when people refuse to see what is right before their eyes. I don’t even know whether they are reading the links I’m posting.

    • Marthe Lépine

      The quote you gave about “Adbusters” says nothing about toppling capitalism; it says “toppling existing power structures”. That is very different – or do you find it totally normal and natural that capitalism – I assume through its links to politicians – holds most of the power, in such a way as making you immediately jump to the conclusion that “toppling poser structures” must be about nothing else than toppling capitalism? Capitalism is supposed to be about the structure of the economy and business; that does not mean that it should have all the power to do as capitalists please! Why should not the power democratically return to 99% of the population?

      • Varenius

        “Toppling existing power structures” is the type of rhetoric commonly used by anti-capitalists, so it’s no surprise that people make this assumption.

      • Rosemarie

        +J.M.J+

        As I’ve posted elsewhere in this thread, the OWS movement has exhibited socialist and communist elements in its literature, rhetoric and choice of speakers. I’m not making this up. Toppling capitalism is one of their stated goals, which is why they’re going after Wall Street, after all.

        When did I ever say that it is “totally normal and natural that capitalism… holds most of the power”? I’ve already expressed my preference for distributism over laissez-faire captialism.

  • Chris

    The answer to all seems so obvious to me. We have the power to control corporations by how and where we spend and invest our money! Look at what happened with the debit-card fee fiasco recently spearheaded by Bank of America. When people called “bull” and started leaving the banks for credit unions, first the smaller banks, and finally Bank of America backed off their idea of charging a monthly fee for use of a debit card.

    In this world where one voice can become a roar in just a few days, we have the power if we’re willing to use it! I think the OWSers time would be better spent telling me (with no spin) what corporations were doing things right and which weren’t. If we put our money where our values are, we have the power to change things dramatically.

    I know it sounds like an over-simplification of things, but sometimes less is more. We don’t need the government “fixing” things with regulations. We have the power, we just have to be willing to accept the responsibility that comes with it!

    • http://7kids6dice1gamerdad.wordpress.com Raul

      The problem is that big business is in bed with big government and the consumer is the one who gets the short end of the stick while the appearances of choice remain, cf. the food industry.

      • http://chicagoboyz.net TMLutas

        The detailed method that big business and big government “get in bed” with each other is that big business hires big government workers and gives them excellent pay for little work after they do regulatory magic to protect big business from new entrants who would be more efficient and serve the market better. Take the power away from government to do that nonsense and there’s no benefit to big business to provide the disguised bribes/revolving door system. They get out of bed because they can no longer have any “fun” together.

    • Rosemarie

      +J.M.J+

      I agree, Chris. There’s got to be a better, more effective way to rein in corporations than threatening to chuck the whole capitalist system and replace it with socialism.

      Like the Legion of Christ, OWS will continue to do (or at least attempt to do) what it was built to do. Sincere participants notwithstanding, OWS has a certain trajectory toward a certain goal. Some within it know what that goal is and continue to work toward it; those unaware of it are “useful idiots” indeed. I can’t support a movement for the sake of its useful idiots; I can only pray that the movement fail to accomplish its ultimate goal.

      • Mark Shea

        The main problem with this thesis is that it is highly dubious that either the OWSers or Tea Partiers have been built to do anything. Both groups are deeply ad hoc. The Legion was, as its name suggests, a highly regimented machine built by an organizational genius. Just as the Tea Parties have dissolved into the confusion we now see played out by the midgets who are running for Prez, to the OWSers give every sign of melting away into anarchy. You can’t simultaneously complain that the OWSers are anarchist *and* a highly structure machine.

        • Rosemarie

          +J.M.J+

          Lasn says that the founders of OWS were inspired by the “Arab spring.” So it was apparently built to bring about revolution through protest, and that’s what they’re trying to do. They may fail; like I said, I hope so. Yet I’m not going to support the movement in any way just because it has some sincere members and an unclear public message. I want to know who is pulling the strings behind the scenes first.

  • Tim

    If only we had listened to Nancy Pelosi about heated rhetoric:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/17/pelosi-warns-of-violence_n_289999.html

  • Peggy R

    I think the talk of “capitalism” and “markets” (free or not) by folks on the left and right misses what the real issue is. We really ought to be talking about the liberty of man to make his own way and to own property for himself and his family. Economic liberty and property rights are what are at stake here. Some people do sinful greedy things with that liberty. Some do great works with the few pennies or many millions that they have earned.

    Economic liberty and property rights are a great advancement to man’s liberty after the chains of slavery and feudalism. Karl Marx specifically despised the US as he saw men escape the caste system of Europe for this new land where a man could make his own way and have his own home and land to work. Now, the Church has, from the beginning expressed concern about such individual rights and about how this liberty has given way to impersonal “markets” and “capitalism” where control over the production of goods can be concentrated–because of technology, this is possible. I can’t imagine the Church prefers slavery or feudalism. We do know the Church opposes communism, but likes some state intervention. (Rome is in Europe, after all).

    We have lots of laws to reign in businesses. Yet, often the costs of regulations can be absorbed by large corporations and hold back the mom and pop shops. There are no “free markets” today.

    These ideas are really too big for me to condense into a combox. So, I’ll just stop at those thoughts now.

    • http://7kids6dice1gamerdad.wordpress.com Raul

      Again, Peggy. I get you on this. This is primarily why as we were warned as Americans that our system can remain only as long as we remain a moral and God-fearing people.

      • Peggy R

        Nice to have a kindred spirit here Raul. Cheers. Peggy

  • Hezekiah Garrett

    if the American right hadn’t spent the last three years calling Obama a Communist, i might trust them to recognize it on sight.

    But the truth is the thing that used to be conservatism wouldn’t Recognise communism if it hit them with a hammer and sickle.

    • http://www.likelierthings.com Jon W

      +1 million to you, sir

    • Varenius

      OK, so let me get this straight…

      Bad: Concluding that OWSers are all communists based on the statements of a few.

      Good: Concluding that Tea Partiers are all poor-despising Randians based on the statements of a few.

      Uh huh.

      • James

        Or claiming all Conservatives are part of the “Thing that Used to Be Conservatism” based upon the opinions of some and not all. And then of course refusing to vote for anyone.

        What I find interesting is the refusal to unequivocally denounce OWS given the level of violence already experienced. That at least would be intellectually consistent,

  • Hezekiah Garrett

    Similarity is a love of entitlements.

    Granted the TP only supports middle-class entitlements and corporate welfare.

    And before our host thinks i am makong a sweeping judgement, I’ve heard it directly from the mouths pf tea partiers that we must balance the budget on the backs of the poor.

    I may find hippies disgusting, but they can always bathe.

    • James

      Now if only they would. :)

    • Peggy R

      HG:

      I have been hearing the “balance the budget on the backs of the poor” tripe since I was a state employee in the early 90s. What the heck does that mean? The poor don’t pay taxes, or pay only a small share of taxes. The taxpayers are bearing the brunt of budget balancing. Tea Partiers do NOT favor corporate subsidies. I guess you missed the anger about TARP and Chrysler & GM bailouts. Let them fail, I say!

    • Varenius

      So they literally said, “Hezekiah, we must balance the budget on the backs of the poor”? Or is that just your biased simplification?

      • Varenius

        I see the answer below: Your words, not theirs. Quelle surprise!

        • Peggy R

          Qu’est-ce que ca veut dire?

          Short of “Hezek….”, yes, literally. The liberals would decry that the state budget would allegedly be “balanced on the backs of the poor.” I don’t understand that. The poor don’t bear the burden of funding state (or federal) government.

        • Peggy R

          Varenius: Oh, maybe you were talking to Hezekiah…? If so, ignore my post. Peggy

          • Varenius

            Yes, I was replying to him.

    • http://chicagoboyz.net TMLutas

      What particular piece of corporate welfare does the tea party believe in? I support none of it and have not heard much support from anybody in the tea party.

      Yes, there are people in the tea party who haven’t quite gotten that their Medicare and Social Security are unsustainable and are going to have to be reworked into something that is not going to bankrupt the nation but that’s an intramural fight that I think is going the right way.

  • Hezekiah Garrett

    Maybe, Martha.

    But you have to understand, shreiking in abject terror while accusing every adversary of the worst evil you can imagine has kind of been the national pastime, at least since the MLB player strike.

    And the softer your oopponent the more you score.

    I mean, notice how gun toting righties fear hippies slitting there throats in the night.

    You heard me rght: hippies.

    Quit laughing, its sad.

    • Varenius

      I mean, notice how gun toting righties fear hippies slitting there throats in the night.

      They do? News to me & all the gun toting righties I know.

      Hezekiah, you hang out with a strange crowd. :-)

      • Tim

        Sometimes I fear suffering an aneurysm when I hear hippies speak.

    • Rosemarie

      +J.M.J+

      If they’re not communists, why are the OWS protesters waving flags with Che Guevara’s face on them in Zuccotti Park?

      New York’s Marxist epicenter
      http://www.nypost.com/f/print/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/new_york_marxist_epicenter_gVrMJIKezP82E3Gkki2IvO

      • Andy

        Is this the same as the Tea Partiers carrying signs with wide ranging racists sentiments, but then saying they are not racist. If you are going to use the statements of a few to demean an entire group then do so with the tea party.

        • Rosemarie

          +J.M.J+

          I stated in various posts above that I don’t agree with everything Tea Partiers say, that the movement isn’t perfect and that it’s had its own extremists. What makes you think I somehow believe that the Tea Party was immaculately conceived or something? Thanks for your perfect demonstration of the tu quoque logical fallacy, though.

          • Rosemarie

            +J.M.J+

            However, if you want to bring racist signs at Tea Party events into the discussion, then lets do it.

            Were the racist placards all over the place, like the Che Guevara flags in Zuccotti Park? Did the organizers of the Tea Party spout racist statements themselves, as an organizer of Occupy Greensboro spouts socialism and call for the end of capitalism in this clip:

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ipyP2ySiBI

            Did the Tea Party activists let white supremacists address the crowd, the way the Occupy Chicago organizers allowed communists to address the protesters:

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avG4LgTF0ho

            It seems to me that the racists at Tea Party events were marginalized while the socialists and communists at OWS protests are given a podium.

  • Hezekiah Garrett

    Aw, you pointed at some corporate welfare that was too big to swallow. But when i suggested maybe we dont need robotic supersuits and uet another generation of missiles, i get called a.timilitary( I’m a vet) and then it Was explained how many jobs rely on these govt contracts.

    When i proposed gutting SS and Medicare, i hear how unfair it is. (I pay into it too and i never will see a dime.) anybody calling for an immediate end to Social welfare, while keeping SS and Medicare and current levels of military -industrial spending absolutely wants to balance the budget on the backs of the poor. Most. Especially. When. They. Object. In. The. Most. Vociferous. Way to raising the tax of the top tiers.z

    And no wonder the poor pay so little, when half this nation shares between them less wealth than the top 401 families.

    I work nearly seventy hrs aweek for a private EMS firm doing public 911. But I grow poorer. And the top just keeps getting richer
    I live intentional poverty. I don’t want more lucre for me. But I have colleagues raising families on food stamps.

    And apparently that’s fine and dandy with ya’ll.

    See I don’t get my info from a media I don’t trust. I get it by breaking bread with Tea Partiers.

    • Peggy R

      I’d be happy to privatize my SS accounts. Medicare will need to be cut in some way. Shall we do it the way of Dr. Death or in a pro-life way? We need not to rely on the government for our wellbeing. The decisions will be political, arbitrary, financially-determined and not considerate of the dignity of the human person. (I know you might say the same about private insurers.) In a market, you have choices and usually a degree of recourse. You won’t have any recourse if the only choice is government.

      I give up trying to explain mathematically why some people earn more than others and why wages of workers, especially those highly-skilled or high-risk-taking, increase while the poor remain poor–the lower income levels are regulated. Choices, skills, risk-taking are factors to consider, as well as, yes, a person’s ethics and priorities.

  • Rosemarie

    +J.M.J+

    >>>And apparently that’s fine and dandy with ya’ll.

    Apparently, you haven’t been reading the posts here very carefully. Opposition to socialism does not necessarily translate into favor of unbridled capitalism, there’s also distributism.

    >>>See I don’t get my info from a media I don’t trust. I get it by breaking bread with Tea Partiers.

    Then why not listen to what we’re really saying while you break virtual bread with us here rather than assuming we’re all engaging in a groundless, irrational Red Scare and accusing us of holding opinions that we don’t hold?

  • Hezekiah Garrett

    As I said before, calling for a balanced budget by gutting social spending for the poor while strongly opposing deep cuts in military spending and middle class entitlement, as well as opposing any tax increase is a call to balance our budget on the backs of the poor.

    Not my fault if the truth hurts.

    And for the record, I don’t join the tea party because you aren’t the least bit committed to really shrinking this government. (Well, I hear Dr Paul has some followers in the TP, but I’ve never met one.)
    When y’all start calling for a real devolution in power, wake me. I’m all for a government small enough to drrown. Even if I’d never do such a thing to the Stuart pretender.

    • Peggy R

      What middle class entitlements? Our family is missing out on those, clearly.

  • Hezekiah Garrett

    I am a fricking Distribitist. Or rather. I got whiplash from nodding in agreement with “The Servile State ” and other Chesterbelloc prose.

    I served in your military. I serve currently in your public safety forces. I’m at this point consciously anti -modern (I’d say that puts most all of you to the ‘left ‘ of me, wouldn’t it?)

    But it is so funny to hear how you fulminate over your kids calling your bs. I’m beginning to think the disparity between your perception of TP and my friends’ perception is generational.

    We’re OWSs age. I’d wager a lot of you fart dust, so to speak.

    • Varenius

      Hezekiah, what’s your point in all this? You don’t seem to be really considering people’s replies, and are increasingly making wild assumptions about others here. Why don’t you take it to folks that actually match the caricatures in your head? You’ll get the same catharsis without disrespecting others by arguing past them.

  • Hezekiah Garrett

    I’m neither arguing with or past any of you. I am laughing with mirth as folks who don’t trust the media when it reports the weather cite it for their contentions,all the while denouncing me for forming mmy impression of their movement by, you know, talking to their confrères.

    And I am wrong to do so?

    I’m gonna bust a gut!!!

  • A Random Friar

    Please tell me no woman allowed her child to be named “Ketchup”

    • David

      “Woman?” please: female-bodied person!

  • David

    If these two (in the Colbert video) are typical of how things are done in the OWS movement, I am surprised it didn’t get violent sooner out of sheer frustration…

    • A Random Friar

      I could imagine Hell being like that, everyone deciding how ice water gets portioned out by consensus, and no one getting a drink in the end.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X