Way back in 1968, after the riots at the Democratic Convention in Chicago, Mayor Daley declared that his forces were there to “preserve disorder.” I believe that was one of Hizzoner’s famous malapropisms. Forty-three years later Jean Quan, mayor of Oakland, and the Oakland city council have made “preserving disorder” the official municipal policy. On Wednesday, the “Occupy Oakland” occupiers rampaged through the city, shutting down the nation’s fifth-busiest port, forcing stores to close, terrorizing those residents foolish enough to commit the reactionary crime of “shopping,” destroying ATMs, spraying the Christ the Light Cathedral with the insightful observation “F**k,” etc. And how did the Oakland city council react? The following day they considered a resolution to express their support for “Occupy Oakland” and to call on the city administration to “collaborate with protesters.”
Advertisement
That’s “collaborate” in the Nazi-occupied-France sense: The city’s feckless political class are collaborating with anarchists against the taxpayers who maintain them in their sinecures. They’re not the only ones. When the rumor spread that the Whole Foods store, of all unlikely corporate villains, had threatened to fire employees who participated in the protest, the regional president, David Lannon, took to Facebook: “We totally support our Team Members participating in the General Strike today — rumors are false!” But, despite his “total support,” they trashed his store anyway, breaking windows and spraypainting walls. As the Oakland Tribune reported:
A man who witnessed the Whole Foods attack, but asked not to be identified, said he was in the store buying an organic orange when the crowd arrived.
There’s an epitaph for the republic if ever I heard one.
The experience was surreal, the man said. “They were wearing masks. There was this whole mess of people, and no police here. That was weird.”
No, it wasn’t. It was municipal policy. In fairness to the miserable David Lannon, Whole Foods was in damage-control mode. Men’s Wearhouse in Oakland had no such excuse. In solidarity with the masses, they printed up a huge poster declaring “We stand with the 99%” and announcing they’d be closed that day. In return, they got their windows smashed.
I’m a proud member of the 1 percent, and I’d have been tempted to smash ’em myself. A few weeks back, finding myself suddenly without luggage, I shopped at a Men’s Wearhouse, faute de mieux, in Burlington, Vt. Never again. I’m not interested in patronizing craven corporations so decadent and self-indulgent that as a matter of corporate policy they support the destruction of civilized society. Did George Zimmer, founder of Men’s Wearhouse and backer of Howard Dean, marijuana decriminalization, and many other fashionable causes, ever glance at the photos of the OWS occupiers and ponder how many of “the 99%” were ever likely to be in need of his two-for-one deal on suits and neckties? And did he think even these dummies were dumb enough to fall for such a feebly corporatist attempt at appeasing the mob?
I don’t “stand with the 99%,” and certainly not downwind of them. But I’m all for their “occupation” continuing on its merry way. It usefully clarifies the stakes. At first glance, an alliance of anarchists and government might appear to be somewhat paradoxical. But the formal convergence in Oakland makes explicit the movement’s aims: They’re anarchists for statism, wild free-spirited youth demanding more and more total government control of every aspect of life — just so long as it respects the fundamental human right to sloth. What’s happening in Oakland is a logical exercise in class solidarity: The government class enthusiastically backing the breakdown of civil order is making common cause with the leisured varsity class, the thuggish union class, and the criminal class in order to stick it to what’s left of the beleaguered productive class. It’s a grand alliance of all those societal interests that wish to enjoy in perpetuity a lifestyle they are not willing to earn. Only the criminal class is reasonably upfront about this. The rest — the lifetime legislators, the unions defending lavish and unsustainable benefits, the “scholars” whiling away a somnolent half decade at Complacency U — are obliged to dress it up a little with some hooey about “social justice” and whatnot.
Well said. How ironic that the Occupiers desire to be nothing more than a statistic and their fellow travelers in government romanticize their acquiescence.
Remember Twain:"Figures often beguile me particularly when I have the arranging of them myself; in which case the remark attributed to Disraeli would often apply with justice and force: 'There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.'"
American Individualism has been demeaned by the liberal establishment and the government school system, both of which have "zero tolerance" policies toward it.. To avoid problems, do nothing, say nothing, be nothing. Ugh!
What I want to know is when does a lie turn into reality? A San Francisco newspaper is questioning why the mainstream media hasn't picked up on one of the presidential hopeful’s homosexuality. Strange, it's the first I ever hear of this. Clearly this "rumor" is based on speculation… Unless of course, someone close to him, like a best friend, an associate, or another politician who has bared witness were to come forward. Imagine John, if they revealed everything they knew, in a "tell all" book. I do believe that a lie could transition into reality at that point. That would be fun, right? But certainly the credibility of the accusations would depend on the credibility of the accuser. For example, a congressman is more credible than a waiter in this matter... Do you not agree? ;-)
"Let it be said that the “occupiers” are right on the banks: They shouldn’t have been bailed out."
But that is not their problem with the banks. This is a common misconception. These Imperialist oppressors had no problem with the bailouts two years ago. Their problem is that the banks exist the way they do: as corporations instead of as arms of the federal government (and it always has to be the federal government, never state). They don't want the bailouts taken back, or paid back. They want the banks nationalized and they want it yesterday.
Indeed. No one had a problem with "Wall Street" when it was helping post annualized returns of 7% and above to their 401ks, IRAs, and pensions and none had a problem when they was "spreading the wealth" via mortgages that no one could afford. Of course, now that the rug has been pulled and revealed an utter mess the blame has to be placed somewhere, and it won't be placed on the entity that even regulates the way we save money and has a vested interest in seeing the forever disenfranchised minority get a house, even though that minority didn't have the means to pay for it.
And both state and local governments had no problems with the rising home values as that meant more revenue from property taxes. Now all that good cheer is gone and the local politicians don't want to face reality.
Citibank, last week, paid $200 million + for purposely lending to unqualified home buyers, bundling and selling these as AAA quality loans. They then bet that those loans would go into default (shorted). The walls started to come down when the owners of these supposedly AAA loan bundles found out they had bought junk. It's a win win for Citi: sell junk as AAA=$$, Short on the likelihood of default=$$.
And you do know that the federal government still has programs in place to help "underwater mortgages", right?
And that Citi was the biggest recipient of bailout funds from the federal government, right?
And that the CEO of Citi contributed to the Obama campaign handsomely, right?
And that the federal government still has laws in place which punishes banks for "redlining" minorities, which are the number one group of people who can't afford mortgages, right?
Oh, and in the grand scheme of things $200 million is chump change compared to the almost $3 trillion the taxpayer is on the hook for for Fannie and Freddie.
Keep trying to divert attention from the real problem and don't be surprised when the problem overwhelms you.
I saw one of the OWS interviewed & he stated that they wanted all banks taken over by the federal government. The news person asked what if a Republican is elected president in 2012. The OWS had obviously never thought of that possibility! He started stammering about If that happened the banks wouldn't be able to continue to be controlled by the Feds - the banks would have to be taken BACK FROM the Feds, but he had no idea who would control the banks for the Republican president's term. He was completely clueless & incoherent.
Mark Steyn simply gets it right everytime - His views are insightful and thought provoking - What bothers me is that there seems to be no one of national prominence i.e. a Senator, Congressman or President (including the wantabes) that has the audacity to bring this terrible consequence we have wrought upon ourselves to bear - Instead they pretend that this situation will resolve itself over time if they continue down the same path (gridlock) - There needs to be a serious conversion of thoughts on how to change course if we are to save our country and everything it really stands for - Our enemies are watching with schadenfreud and salivating over our self destruction, just waiting to strike - This is almost the lowest point I could imagine America the Beautiful to be - These occupiers appear to be totally clueless on what they hope to achieve by all this sorted nonsensical give me a handout rubbish - They should have paid closer attention in their History class instead of sending texts or tweeting to their mates - Our fearless leader on the other hand has done everything possible within the reigns of power and beyond to provide the necessary catalyst to exacerbate class warfare and bring this country down to it's knees - We definately got the change part, but the hope is we have learned from this terrible nightmare and will vote to remove this despot from our national inner sanctum.
Excuse my quibbling, but I respectfully suggest that many of the occupiers would know exactly what to do with a hammer, and I am relieved to learn from Pete Seeger that they do not possess them.
Same group, same outfits (yep there were hoodies back in the 60's), different decade. Spoiled brats. Go volunteer somewhere but quit destroying other people's property. This age group is the one brought up on self-esteem classes, everybody gets a trophy, no dodge ball, etc. Oh, and work the schedule You want, have the breaks at work You want, and have your Mom call your employer to demand to know why you didn't get a raise. And don't forget the"helicopter parent" who hovers over their college child and calls every day. Yep, we are in trouble.
Nicely done, Mr. Steyn. "America's revolting youth," indeed. And the nitwits encouraging this helter-skelter never left their revolting youth. They have romanticized a past that led to further intrusion on our liberties.
Mobs have no conscience. Irresponsible mayors like the one in Oakland should be ousted from office for encouraging this civil breakdown.
I am reminded of the confrontation of Sherburn against the cowardly, self-righteous mob in Huckleberry Finn. Sherburn rightly identifies the pusillamity of mobs who wilt when identified as weak, characterless, but very noisy. Mobs scatter when the sunlight of exposure shines on their shallowness.
"It’s the voice of youth, yet everything about it is cobwebbed."
Too true, 21th century youth, dressed up as 20th century youth, spouting 19th century socialist slogans--futher proof that the left is out of ideas.
Follow
