I grew up anti-Communist. I remain anti-Communist. I share with my National Review colleagues and forebears an abiding hatred of Communism. And that hatred extends to ill-conceived, poorly articulated, envy-driven jargon from street radicals. But at the same time I’ve got to say there’s something truly refreshing, even reassuring, about the all of the Marxist twaddle coming out of these protests. These Red goons, buffoons, ruffians and tatterdemalions didn’t spring forth ex nihilo. They’ve been living among us all of this time. All that is new is the opportunity for them to out themselves in YouTube videos and the rest.
I think we’ve all known that, but it’s useful to be reminded of it. It’s also useful (as I argue in the current issue) to be reminded of the fact that given the flimsiest of excuses a great number of mainstream liberals will drop their apparently feigned resolve against leftwing radicalism and leap at the opportunity to express solidarity with the crazies. So far, except for one honorable dissent from the editors of The New Republic, I haven’t seen any prominent liberals expressing any serious concern about what the occupiers are actually saying. And what significant reluctance we have seen from liberal politicians, starting with Obama, is quite transparently motivated not by principle but by strategy. If the Occupy Wall Street mob swept the country, I’m sure some of these liberals would, eventually, find a backbone — particularly when it came time to redistribute their stock portfolios or seize their McMansions. But until then, most of them seem perfectly happy to encourage the rabble and treat their ideas as legitimate.
Here’s one useful tip: Whenever the substance of the Occupy Wall Street movement troubles Democratic politicians their response is to hide behind platitudes about free speech. “It’s about their right to express themselves!” Well, no it’s not. Free speech is important, but it’s really not the issue. It certainly wasn’t even much of a concern when it was the Tea Party expressing itself — which it managed to do without inviting mass arrests. Back then, leading Democrats considered dissent racist or un-American. Now they celebrate free speech so they can hide from dealing with the issues at hand honestly. Democratic politicians think that this gives them cover. It doesn’t. It just shows that they’re afraid to disagree with the protesters either because they agree with them or because they know the protests are popular among their own supporters. Either way, it’s proof that the much ballyhooed wall between mainstream radicalism and mainstream liberalism is more like a speed bump.
It’s one thing to have suspicions. It’s another thing to have them confirmed. And for that, I’m grateful for Occupy Wall Street.
"These Red goons, buffoons, ruffians and tatterdemalions ..."
Actually, the ones that bother me the most are the rathscallions and the ne'er-do-wells.
"Now they celebrate free speech so they can hide from dealing with the issues at hand honestly ..."
Ah, yes. Communists, anti-communists, and the good old dependable anti-anti-communists. Not only is the struggle eternal but, apparently, so are all the alignments.
Great post. The final paragraph was particularly apt.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseJonah thinks if the movement gets real serious, then we'll start seeing liberals dissent from it.
I think the opposite is true. If it gets much bigger, or if they start to enjoy electoral success as a result of their specific co-ordination, we can expect Jane Harmon's husband to provide the amplifiers at their rallies.
The liberals who've offered mealy-mouthed solidarity are ideologically aligned with OWS, and are hedging their bets. If this becomes an actual movement with political action, the liberals are all in.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI think he meant seriously out of control...violence and the like.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhat makes you think a violence component would signal "out of control"? From the speakers who have invoked the necessity of violence to smash the system or get more free pizza or whatever, I would think that any violence would be by design.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI think they'd be even quicker to line up behind it once it turns violent. This is the party of "Free Mumia" and Che t-shirts and Jim Jones, after all.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseHarmon's dead. Died a couple months ago.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseHarmon-Kardon is alive and well. They could easily provide the integrated amps.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYes, I and all my fellow minivan driving PTA leading fancy cheese eating liberal friends in my quiet little suburban town can't wait to camp out with OWS types. We'll have to fit in between driving the kids to Boy Scout meetings and religious school, but liberal suburban moms exel at multi-tasking.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIt is important not to cede the moral high ground to the #OWS, for they don't have it. It needs to be pointed out to the nation why this is so.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI'm thrilled these people are able to broadcast themselves on YouTube. Over many decades socialists have relied on lies to achieve power. They have lied about their intentions with policies and cultural memes. And they sell it with mainstream-acceptable spokespeople like Cronkite, Rather, etc.
No more. It's all out in the open and I welcome it. It is the Internet that allows truly-held beliefs - from all sides - to be honestly sold in the marketplace of ideas and I like our chances. We are witnessing an Internet Reformation, not unlike what the Gutenberg press had sparked.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"tatterdemalions"
New word for me! wØØt!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseJonah Goldberg has been drinking too much ideological kool-aid if the he thinks that the Occupy Wall Street protests are primarily about Communism.
Give me a break. It is a public protest. In that case, people like Goldberg will always willfully close their eyes and ears and see what they want in the protest from the many voices present. In this case, because Goldberg wants to delegitimize the protests (good luck with that Don Quixote!) he is going to listen to whatever voices make the movement seem as unreasonable as possible.
I for one think that the sort of self-deceptive mental processes employed here are fascinating.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWho to believe?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe kids doing the marching, or our local far left apologist who lies about everything else?
OK, I'll bite. So what are the protests about?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSo tell us, David, what is this public protest about?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseDavid, not sure how much stock you'll put in the first hand experiences of another NRO blogger, but here goes anyway.
External Link
How much evidence does it take for a man of the left to concede that large strains of communism are still alive and well in your movement? And that in a crowd of uninhibited radicals they're not at all shy about saying so?
I mean, is that really a controversial statement?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWell, I don't know.
I see a lot of people wanting to have their student loans forgiven. Hand in hand with that go demands for six-figure starting salaries for people who took degrees in things like "Quare Green International Political Science Studies," (to put an Irish accent on a word NRO finds objectionable) or other equally useful and in-demand subjects.
I read elsewhere that all the literature being handed out at these protests is socialist and communist. Certainly I have seen numerous YouTube videos where unwashed-looking hippies talk about "the bourgeoisie," "the working class," and "the means of production." Sounds Marxist, at best.
So, maybe you have a point, but it seems to me the protestors are useful idiots providing cover for socialists and communists.
=====
Completely off topic, but I find it amusing to hear these protestors complain the government is utterly corrupt, having been bought and paid for by the Jooooooos, and solution to this corruption is ... more government.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"Completely off topic,"
Given that the American Nazi Party and CPUSA have endorsed OWS, their compliants about Joooos running everything are completely ON topic.
"...but I find it amusing to hear these protestors complain the government is utterly corrupt, having been bought and paid for by the Jooooooos, and solution to this corruption is ... more government."
I don't find it amusing; I find it alarming. The best way to make sure the gubmint gets bigger is to wreak havoc and chaos on the streets, which fairly "forces" the gubmint to expand its powers (again) to quell the rebellion.
It's how the Taliban took Afghanistan. "Save us from the chaos!" people say.
The real powers behind OWS don't yammer on to random, unidentified videographers, so that's why most of what we see are the useful idiots (who are annoying but largely harmless) instead of the hard-core revolutionaries who have been planning to overwhelm then collapse our weakened financial system.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSo, are you tacitly admitting the left wing response to the Tea Party movement was all wet, with your perverted sexual references and cries of racism?
Or, do your comments only pertain to anti-communist or anarchic protests?
Here's an idea: become an adult before you deign to think you know anything. Rolling onto this site from your dormitory twin-sized cot undermines your street cred.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbusePlease David, like so many others, I would love for you to enlighten us as to the "real" meaning of these protests. Because obviously we shouldn't just trust our own lying eyes and ears, or take the protestors at their word. That wouldn't be fair. Instead, please tell us what the protestors really mean to say when they rant about redistribution of wealth, class warfare, student loan forgiveness and caps on earnings. Help us understand, David.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse