Occupiers as Mindless Drones -UPDATE

Wow. And they say religious folk want to be told what to think and what to say!

This is pathetic. It reminds me of kindergarten. It’s actually kind of terrifying: “just tell me what to say and I’ll parrot it.” Completely mindless.

UPDATE: At the urging of a few commenters, I looked at the video again, and concede that this may in fact be less a mindless-drone-fest than I had thought. As some know, I don’t venture forth into crowds very often, so I have not experienced or witnessed microphone-free people having their every word repeated by a crowd for the sake of others. That seems to be what this, in which case I gladly admit my error. I don’t mind admitting when I’m wrong. I wonder if any of the folk in that crowd would admit that some of what they’re repeating is wrong. Or at least distorted?

But I still say “the whole world is watching,” chants we hear elsewhere are stale, that ultimately the “Occupation” is going to backfire because the populace is in no mood for being told what to do or having anything rammed down their throats. And I do think many are watching with a combination of disgust and morbid fascination, and thinking, “second time farce.”

YouTube Preview Image

About Elizabeth Scalia
  • Jenny

    That’s one of the strangest things I have ever seen.

  • Paul

    This is right out of 1984. This is what happens when a generation is raised by parents who used far too many illegal drugs.

  • Kevin

    This post and these comments seem terribly mean spirited. Also, there is nothing mindless going on here. This is simply an example of a human PA system. They didn’t have any equipment, so they used their own voices to amplify the thoughts of this small group so everyone around them could here. It is actually a creative fix it seems to me. There is certainly plenty of parroting of political positions going on these days. I’m sure the anchoress must be equally critical of the right wing in America when they do the same. I can’t believe she might deliberately misconstrue something or take something out of context to score cheap shots on people she disagrees with.

  • Kevin

    so everyone around them could here

    “hear,” I mean. Don’t tell me you weren’t thinking of snarkily correcting thet. Tat. That.

  • Rhinestone Suderman

    It is very strange. There’s something about those stiff hand gestures that seems. . . creepy.

  • friscoeddie

    If you keep looking for Obama doom signs like this posting you guys will never find a candidate.. get busy .. no time left for a fun campaign..

  • TXRed

    It is both creepy and pathetic. Creepy in that the protesters are so easily led and “programmed” for lack of a better word. Pathetic in that they seem to have no ability to think for themselves and to appreciate why the things they dislike are the way they are. This entire “occupy Wall Street” has been peculiar from the onset, when the organizers said they would form a group and then decide on what their demands were. Very strange.

  • Jason

    With no money for microphones or dealing with logistics around communication, I think it is a very creative way to communicate to large numbers (weird, but creative). Don’t get too doom and gloomy, I really don’t think its intent is to repeat and agree, just repeat so others can hear what is said.

    [Odd. Seems to me they can hear just fine, which is why they're able to repeat -admin]

  • conservativemama

    I wouldn’t have believed it if I hadn’t seen it. It’s no wonder that people have been mistreated throughout history. If you allow yourself to become such a drone, don’t be surprised when you’re used.

    Pathetic. And sad. And scary.

    My fear is that this experiment called the USA will be but a blip in human history. This idea that each human life matters, that we are to be trusted with self-government can disappear is frightening. The default of human history has been misery for most, with an elite who lives well. Our founders left us a wonderful country and we have people who would throw it all away. What an extravagance. People around the world die, literally die to get here, and these fools are so cavalier about their good fortune to live in the United States. It’s the worse extravagance. It’s their greediness. They have the most freedom of any people on the planet and they waste it. They are greedy. They have everything and don’t want to share it. Instead of speading the enlightened ideas of our founders, they peddle the dead, dehumanizing visions of Marx and other totalitarians. There are no words.

  • Paul

    Kevin, please define exactly what you mean by “mean spirited.” That phrase seems to be a trump card to be played anytime someone says something that someone else may not agree with. Disagreement is not being mean spirited. Beyond that, being from Chicago I know that the crowd chant is a classic technique employed by people who are more interested in drowning out disagreement than dialog.

  • JoAnn in CO

    WEIRD. This doesn’t seem very effective to me….Pretty much puts most people off….

  • Kevin

    There is a trump being played here but not by me. Start by misreading the meaning of event and then amplify that misreading.

    You really can’t see anything mean spirited in the above post? I don’t know how else to appreciate the following excerpt: “This is pathetic. It reminds me of kindergarten. It’s actually kind of terrifying: ‘just tell me what to say and I’ll parrot it.’ Completely mindless.”

    There is no effort to engage anyone in this or begin a dialogue of any sort. There is no Christian charity in it. It is just a pile of abuse. Worse, it completely misreads what this video depicts. A whole parade of comments after the post follows the faulty observation at the heart of it, and you come to a similar misinterpretation when the video clearly does not depict anyone trying to drown out disagreement. How could it? They agree with each other.

  • dry valleys
  • elmo

    Anchoress, I think you are off base here. The protestors may well be mindless drones but this video is not evidence of that. The reason the people near the speaker are repeating her remarks is so that the people far from the speaker, i.e., the back of the crowd, can hear what she has to say. Electronic audio amplification is not allowed so this is the only way those who are not near the speaker can hear her remarks.

  • Rhinestone Suderman

    Kevin, the video is there, it shows what it shows, and some of us do find it, well—off-putting. It’s like watching newsreels of WWII era Germans shout “Sieg Heil!” or Japanese soldiers shouting “Bonzai!”. Let’s face it—given the sorry history of the 20th Century, any group of people mechanically chanting slogans at a political rally is going to bother at least some of the observers. (Especially after the last presidential campaign, with all its “Hope ‘n Change!” “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for!” rah, rah, rah.)

    And, what, precisely, is the true meaning of this event that we’re not getting, and what sort of dialogue do these people supposedly want—and how do they even expect to carry on a dialogue, when they’re mindlessly chanting? Are they actually there to dialogue, or are they just trying to shout down the opposition, as the Left so frequently does?

    Is it really the “mean-spiritedness” that bothers you, or the fact that we’re daring to criticize this particular group of people?

  • Rhinestone Suderman

    Valleys:

    1. The occupiers claim they want to bring down capitalism. Capitalism, as opposed to Marxism and Socialism, has a much better track record of creating prosperity, and furthering human happiness; no matter how idealistic, or well intentioned the Wall Street squatters may be (and, of course, not all of them are), they’re basically pushing the same ol’, same ol’, we had to put up with during the horrible 20th Century, i.e., centralized government, attacks on “the rich” and “Kulaks”, re-education and forced equality—which ends up making all equally miserable. Those who disagree with their point of view are not doing so just to be mean ol’ meanies.

    Furthermore, the occupiers are blocking traffic and irritating the heck out of ordinary New Yorkers (who already have enough to contend with).

    2. Wall Street isn’t really the problem. If they want to go after the rich, they should go occupy Hollywood/West L.A.—or George Soros’ front lawn.

    3. Any article which actually uses the phrase “Rich toffs” can’t be taken seriously.

  • Rhinestone Suderman

    conservativemamma, they also all look very well-dressed, and well fed.

    Do they really think they’ll still be able to shop at Old Navy, and Whole Foods, if they get rid of capitalism?

    (And, of course, Marxist/socialism has worked out so well, to date! Okay, sarc. off.)

  • friscoeddie

    I guess you guys missed the mindless chant at the rally done by Deepak Chopra .. Is he too a ‘mindless drone’?
    He is certainly the “other’ ..As I said before go out and find a real electable GOP candidate and stop the silly bashing.. it won’t quench your own fear of the dark.
    O! And don’t go to a Trappist monastery you might hear ‘mindless chanting’

    [Hey, Friscoeddie -- I've admitted I was wrong. I have no fear of the dark or of the "other." Or of admitting I'm wrong. Why don't you let go of some of your own dearly-held caricatures and stereotypes? -admin]

  • elmo

    I do think Chopra is a mindless drone, yes.

  • Teresa

    The speaker was Frances Fox-Piven, a far left radical, who can always be depended upon to say the most mindless things in public when given the chance. I hope the drones keep it up because it is truly weird and at the same time scary. Normal people should really see these radicals in action and then vote next year.

  • Rhinestone Suderman

    friscoeddie, I know you’re going to find this hard to accept—but not everybody is a fan of Deepak Chopra, or puts much stock in what he says.

    While I wouldn’t call him “other”, exactly, he’s certainly, um—something.

    (And, of course, liturgical chant is a very thing from occupying a street, and chanting political slogans. As for electable Republican candidates, I don’t know what that has to do with this; and the dark doesn’t frighten me, except when I’m afraid I might stumble over the cat. The “other” (whatever that is) doesn’t frighten me either, even if it happens to be Deepak Chopra. . .

  • tempus fugit

    What a bunch of lemmings.

  • Greta

    Do not have a clue what they want, willing to shut down everything to get it, and will probably keep doing it until someone pays attention.

    They are doing things that the left always wanted to see the Tea Party folks doing such as shut down streets or bridges or blow something up or kill someone. The left always expected it because that is what they do with their mob rule. I do not remember a tea party ever doing what these fools are doing and the tea party had very specific ideas about what they wanted..follow the constitution as written, massively slim down government spending and regulations, no more government bail outs or takeovers, and get judges who would not legislate from the bench.

    As best I can understand these fools, they want to break laws, steal money, and tear down the constitution and create a socialist state. Is that about it??

  • Mercedes Lackey

    Mary, the mother of Jesus, spoke clearly about his coming and his meaning in history when she prophesied about his mission in her famous prayer/song known as the Magnificat. She predicts how the child in her womb will reverse the status quo, saying, “He has brought down rulers from their thrones but has lifted up the humble. He has filled the hungry with good things and sent the rich away empty.”

    You see, when you actually read the Bible (rather than making selective political reference to it as so many often do), you find that it is filled with passages echoing progressive liberation theology, from “the meek shall inherit the earth” to its diatribes against usury. Additionally, one of its central characters seems to have anti-capitalist tendencies. As reported by the Washington Post’s Gregory Paul:

    “Jesus is no free marketeer. Improving one’s earthly financial circumstances is not nearly as critical as preparing for the end times that will arrive at any minute. He does offer substantial encouragement for the poor, and warns the wealthy that they are in grave danger of blowing their prospects of reaching paradise, as per the metaphor of a rich person entering heaven being as difficult as a camel passing through the eye of the needle…

    To understand just how non-capitalistic Christianity is supposed to be we turn to the first chapter after the gospels, Acts, which describes the events of the early church. Chapters 2 and 4 state that all “the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need … No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had … There were no needy persons among them. From time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need.””

    Now folks, that’s outright socialism of the type described millennia later by Marx — who likely got the general idea from the gospels.

    [Nice try, but you miss the crucial distinction between the "sharing in common" of the Christian community and Marxism: The Christians did not compel anyone -- their participation was voluntary; they did not demand that the entire culture and nation submit to their redistribution. It's a crucial difference because as you can see in any monastery, voluntary participation succeeds. Compulsion fails. And this is why, in fact, in communist/socialist societies the first things that are closed and disbanded by the governments are the monasteries, and eventually the churches. In order for a false redistributive community to survive it must destroy what is genuine. While your tone suggests that you have read scripture more than anyone else here possibly could have, I think we can presume that the two most recent popes have perhaps read enough scripture, and pondered the Magnificat, enough to satisfy you where others' readings have failed. If that is true, then you might want to consider that both of these men -- who both lived parts of their lives under the Jackbook of totalitarian societies that sold themselves on their "fairness" for all -- have pointed out the deficiencies of capitalism to be sure, but have also rejected the lies, compulsions and freedom-encroaching actualities of the socialist dreamstate. I do believe I will take my cues from those two brilliant men who actually have lived through the best and worst of times, rather than from you. But I do appreciate your taking the time to come and instruct us and to urge us to read more scripture, which is always good advice. admin]

  • Rhinestone Suderman

    Marxists always like those parts of scripture that seem to support collectivism.

    They’re much less enthusiastic about those passages that condemn homosexuality, abortion, divorce, adultery, gluttony; that demand we honor our mother and father, repent our own, individual sins, not boast about our own good works, flaunt our righteousness like the Pharisees or nitpick and play pointless word games, like the Sadduceess.

    I haven’t noticed that they’re much into forgiving their enemies, either.

    That’s the New Testament. As for the Old Testament, most of them dislike it, and would be only too happy to see it relegated to the dustbin of history, as being sexist, capitalist, homophobic, imperialist, what have you.

  • Kevin

    “watching newsreels of WWII era Germans shout “Sieg Heil!” or Japanese soldiers shouting “Bonzai!”

    Really? All I see are people exercising their constitutional rights in a free society.

    And yeah, thanks for clarifying that there is no mean spiritedness going on here, just move along, by dismissing these people and their protest as “lemmings,” mindless, weird, not “real people,” marxists, fools, chanting drones, etc.

    Let’s ignore the fact that no one is chanting, that they are all speaking their own minds, and by all means let’s not stop for a second to explore the significance of what they are REALLY saying/protesting, not what the commentators above think they are saying, wish they were saying or find easiest to presume they are saying or what they have heard certain media outlets report they are saying. It is so much easier to prop up our strawmen and take shots at that then to actually pause a moment and listen.

    Am I upset that you brave few are “daring” to criticize these people? Please. You can’t be serious. What is daring here is to challenge the presumption of the author and her followers, not to crowd into the chorus.

    What I most object to here, however, again is the lack of Christian charity and I would regret that at a left wing blog as well. You can disagree with people and criticize their political positions without stooping to this. It is not really that hard, and I think it is the example we are called to make, particularly at this fractious point in U.S. civic life.

  • Rhinestone Suderman

    Kevin, I seriously doubt it’s the “Lack of Christian charity” you claim that’s truly upsetting you here.

    As for calling them “Marxists”—that’s what they claim themselves to be, when they call for an end to capitalism (along with other demands, such as free education for all, open borders and the like)

    And, no matter how idealistic, or well-intentioned they might be, the 20th Century has proved them wrong, wrong, wrong on the efficacy of collectivism. I’m all in favor of charity, but not to the point where you can’t to criticize, or even laugh at, bad political systems, and their followers—especially when said followers make fools of themselves—because that would not be charitable, you know. As Paul pointed out, the “mean spirited” charge has become a trump card—the one waving it, supposedly gets to silence everybody else.

    The 70′s are over. The days when Leftist protestors would be automatically hailed as idealistic protestors, and their demands, and street theater, taken seriously by a media which covered up their excesses, and outright silliness, are over.

    (As I said, I really don’t think it’s lack of Christian charity that’s really bothering you, in this case.)

  • Rhinestone Suderman

    #20 Teresa, hasn’t Frances Fox-Piven called for armed insurrection against the United States?

  • Kevin

    Rhinestone:

    So now you’re a mind reader as well.

    I’m not sure what you mean by ‘upset’; I have hardly been running to my therapist over the suffering I’ve endured at this blog.

    I note that you will insist on having the last word even though your above analysis of this video has been completely erroneous.

    You can take a comment here and there and attempt to dismiss these kids as Marxists. Most of them, it seems to me, are merely appealing for jobs and a future they see slipping away. I do not hear demands for a “collectivist” society, but that certainly is an easier position to deplore, so have it. I could engage in mere sophistry, too.

    How’s that again? Doesn’t seem to have accomplished that here. I can’t say what kind of trump that accusation is supposed to rhetorically play anywhere, but after a quick scan of the above thread it’s pretty easy for me stand by what I said and invite any fair minded visitors to scroll through the comments above and come to their own conclusions.

  • Kevin

    Let’s try this again:

    Rhinestone:

    I seriously doubt it’s the “Lack of Christian charity” you claim that’s truly upsetting you here

    So now you’re a mind reader as well.

    I’m not sure what you mean by ‘upset’; I have hardly been running to my therapist over the suffering I’ve endured at this blog.

    I note that you will insist on having the last word even though your above analysis of this video has been completely erroneous.

    You can take a comment here and there and attempt to dismiss these kids as Marxists. Most of them, it seems to me, are merely appealing for jobs and a future they see slipping away. I do not hear demands for a “collectivist” society, but that certainly is an easier position to deplore, so have it. I could engage in mere sophistry, too.

    –As Paul pointed out, the “mean spirited” charge has become a trump card—the one waving it, supposedly gets to silence everybody else.–

    How’s that again? Doesn’t seem to have accomplished that here. I can’t say what kind of trump that accusation is supposed to rhetorically play anywhere, but after a quick scan of the above thread it’s pretty easy for me stand by what I said and invite any fair minded visitors to scroll through the comments above and come to their own conclusions.

  • Kevin

    hasn’t Frances Fox-Piven called for armed insurrection against the United States?

    Yeah. No. She didn’t, but Glenn Beck implied she did and if that is where you get your info on contemporary American life, the other comments (Seig hiel, bonzai, etc.) begin to make sense.

  • Rhinestone Suderman

    Nope, not Beck—I got it from other sources.

    Oh, come on, Kevin. . . it’s very obvious you’re firmly on the side of the protesters. They’re not Marxists (according to you—even though they’re calling for the destruction of capitalism), they’re just appealing for jobs, and a future they see slipping away, etc., etc. etc.

    Most people who need jobs go out and look for them. They don’t occupy a street, chanting, demanding somebody—anybody—give them something. And, if they’re not collectivists, what, exactly, do they see replacing the capitalism they’re so eager to get rid of?

    It’s not the lack of Christian charity that upsets you; it’s the fact we’re just not taking them at their own valuation! (And, sorry, they do seem. . . strange in that video; that’s my gut reaction to it. You’re not going to change that, by telling me, over and over, that I just don’t understand the poor things.)

  • Keith

    “Most people who need jobs go out and look for them.”

    There are no jobs to be found and there is increasingly no hopes or prospects for the future. If you take a considered and researched view of the protesters (rather than falling back on “gut reactions”), you will understand that a large number of them are in fact “99ers” (unemployed people out on the lamb with no prospects at all) or are college graduates with a lot of student debt and little in the way of job prospects.

    They understand that the median wage for the average worker has declined for over 30 years, that there is a massive amount of wealth being accumulated by the greatest earners that does not go into investment or anything not overseas and that banks who played a role in driving the economy into recession and mass unemployment were bailed out at the expense of everyone else.

    They are understandably pretty angry and you will see that come out in broad attacks on capitalism because corporate-driven capitalism has, pretty honestly, failed these people.

  • Doc

    No, what has failed these people is the government education they’ve received. If they want jobs, they ought to be protesting at the White House, where the guy most responsible for job destruction lives.

    Have you guys even read their list of “13 demands”? It’s pure Communist propaganda.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X