Last semester, as the drama of Occupy Wall Street unfolded, I asked my students in my Business Organizations class (about 70 students are in the class) if they were following the movement. Only a few said they were. Some of them had not heard of OWS even though the New York occupation was about a month old at the time I asked. And when I asked if any of them had gone to the park where the Occupiers were camped out, only two students raised their hands. One of the students was Christopher Dekki. After that class, Chris and I had several interesting discussions about the OWS movement. Because I enjoyed hearing his insights, I am posting Chris’ observations about the movement in this post. Chris provides an update on the current status of OWS, and he brings to the discussion his perspective as a young man concerned about our nation’s future. What follows are Chris’ observations.
"Stop Mourning and Cancel the Funeral: Occupy Wall Street Is Alive and Well
By Christopher Dekki
When young people speak, the elite tends to look away. When young people shout, the elite covers it ears hoping the racket eventually stops. When young people take to the streets, the elite comes up with slanderous labels to delegitimize the struggle upon which the youth have embarked. All of this happened as Occupy Wall Street evolved from a mere urban pest buzzing around the ears of the leaders of the corporate-political industrial complex, to a veritable threat: a threat to an undeniably unjust status quo. From the very inception of the movement, those in the government and the corporate media have been utterly flustered by the commotion surrounding OWS. The Washington elite could not seem to muster enough negativity to describe the activists who have taken up the mantle of protest from earlier generations of progressives. In recent months, foolish pundits and conservative politicos derisively declared the OWS movement to be dead after several flummoxed mayors used abhorrent force to push protestors out of the public eye. Although these mayors managed to clear a few tents and take the heat off their embattled city streets, they have not been able to vanquish OWS. The ideas heralded into the political discourse by OWS have managed to infiltrate almost every level of the political realm of the United States. It was the cries of young OWS activists that awakened the long dormant beast that is populist political fervor. So contrary to what so many pundits believe to be absolute truth, OWS is alive, well, and unquestionably pervasive.
A good way to measure the success of OWS is to compare it to its parallel grassroots movement on the right, the Tea Party. The Tea Party was born in what appears to have been a racially charged response to a black man defiantly overcoming all social obstacles to win control of the White House. Although many in the Tea Party claim to be crusading against the excesses of the federal government, there is simply no denying the racial underpinnings of the entire movement. It is doubtful that if Joe Biden were the current president, the Tea Party would be as electrified as it has been over the past two years. Now, compare the establishment of that right wing movement to the birth of OWS. OWS gained strength at a time when the left was technically in control of some aspects of the government. OWS rose up against all sides of the very limited American political spectrum and made a bold and truly authentic statement that certain things simply need to change. So while the Tea Party appears to be a reaction to a so-called “uppity” black man rising to the highest political office in the United States, OWS sprang forth to combat a real threat to our republican system of government: the power and influence of money in politics.
Besides the issues that gave birth to the Tea Party and OWS, the legitimacy of both movements can be measured by their degrees of political independence. While OWS remains free from the control of the Washington establishment, the Tea Party was co-opted by the GOP long ago. This has made the Tea Party vulnerable to the vices that currently poison American politics. OWS was never transformed into a vehicle of the Democratic Party. OWS does not endorse politicians nor does it seek to take sides in partisan struggles. In addition, many within the Democratic Party have been afraid to directly support OWS. Of course, nobody in Washington wants to be branded a “liberal” since that apparently translates into political suicide. So as the Tea Party, through its elected officials in Congress, causes chaos and embarrassment for the country, OWS remains firmly autonomous and staunchly true to its principles.
OWS may have many detractors, but it can take pride in the fact that it has never been a source of political obstruction. It has not helped cause the US credit downgrade. It never helped spur embarrassingly cruel politicians like Allen West into elected office. It has never called for an apocalyptic war on Iran. It stands up to American jingoism and modern economic imperialism. It recognizes the flaws of American capitalism and realizes that corrupt politicians on both sides of the aisle continue to act as surrogates for omnipotent corporate interests. OWS has stepped up to bat and has turned political rhetoric on its head even as the effects of Citizens United take a devastating toll on society. As a result, the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Karl Rove are free to believe whatever they like. This is not the first time they have turned their backs on reality in order to further their destructive neoconservative agendas. Occupy Wall Street is a viable force in American society it is now the turn of the people to ensure that the American government ceases to be a puppet of the 1% and begins to serve the interests of the 99%."
Wednesday, February 8, 2012
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Wow. Great discussion. I happen to agree with most points. In my experience with ows. There has definitely been some cross pollination with democrats. It's important to note that liberal/progressive ideology underpins a large fraction of ows, and to that extent, the democratic party is a natural ally. Pauline's and anarchists will never sign on to that, but the 99% resonates with Dems and it should not be overlooked as ows evolves, hopefully, into a political voice that engages in electoral politics and runs candidates for office.
ReplyDeleteVery good arguments Chris. I agree with your point that OWS has done well to not affiliate with either party. It is the OWS's mission to unravel the misconceptions of the corporatocracy that plagues BOTH ends of the political spectrum and it is for that reason that their stance cannot be shaken now or in the future. Party affiliation of the OWS would prove them hypocritical and inefficient additions to the conundrum that is American politics.
ReplyDeletechris:
ReplyDeleteback in october, the regular contributors to this blog all posted about the occupy wall street movement through a month-long thread. one of the criticisms of the movement that came out was that the movement seemed to lack leadership and also seemed to lack a unified message and goal. do you believe that either of these perceived weaknesses have changed in the past four months? or do you not agree that the movement lack leadership and vision?
thanks for contributing your thoughts. and thanks to professor wade for opening up the space for you to do so.
Thanks for your comment! One of the greatest strengths of a bona fide grassroots movement is that the essential ideas are more important than the people who promote them. OWS appears leaderless and lacking in vision because far too many people scrutinize it through a national lens. OWS groups in cities around the country have general assemblies and work towards accomplishing goals that the national movement shares as a whole. Nevertheless, each local group is unique and is more or less independent from other OWS groups. So whereas a few loudmouth right wing clowns have taken the reigns of the Tea Party for their own political benefit, OWS' national leadership remains nebulous because it continues to remain the quintessential grassroots movement of contemporary times. It truly has not been co-opted in any way by the elite.
DeleteVery interesting post. I look forward to reading more insights from you, Chris.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteHere is something funny for everyone to see! Enjoy!
ReplyDeletehttps://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/395793_251474168260619_134176153323755_568234_1053730564_n.jpg
"OWS sprang forth to combat a real threat to our republican system of government: the power and influence of money in politics ... OWS has stepped up to bat and has turned political rhetoric on its head even as the effects of Citizens United take a devastating toll on society." -- Christopher Dekki
ReplyDelete"People banding together in groups and exercising their right to free speech, to protest a court decision that held that people should be able to band together in groups and exercise their right to free speech — that's a little bit ironic." -- Institute for Justice attorney Steve Simpson
"OWS was never transformed into a vehicle of the Democratic Party. OWS does not endorse politicians nor does it seek to take sides in partisan struggles. In addition, many within the Democratic Party have been afraid to directly support OWS." -- Christopher Dekki
ReplyDeleteYou're joking, right?
OWS was, from the beginning, a creation of the Democrat Party and their union, academic and community organizing fellow travelers. The concept for the movement started with the "Take Back the American Dream" conference in Washington, D.C. where Democrat activists gathered to studied the origins of the Tea Party hoping to build a countermovement to support liberal causes. OWS has been handsomely financed by the unions and wealthy leftists. The young people, who are supposedly speaking truth to the elites, are simply "useful idiots". They're stooges, manipulated into conducting street theater. When the encampments inevitably fell into wanton lawlessness, sexual degeneracy and putrid squalor the Democrats moved quickly to distance themselves from the monster that they had created, while the left-leaning media did all they could to cover-up or downplay the unfolding orgy of depravity and violence. Now that the Democrats have achieved a degree of perceived disistance they can make statements supporting or condemning the "Occupiers" as they choose.
"OWS' national leadership remains nebulous because it continues to remain the quintessential grassroots movement of contemporary times. It truly has not been co-opted in any way by the elite." -- Christopher Dekki
ReplyDelete"Occupy" CPAC protestors paid $60 a day by unions to do Democrats bidding
So much for "grassroots".
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DeleteExcellent piece Chris! I agree with a lot of what you are saying and as one of the "youth" I have found myself inspired by OWS to think and act towards building a better world that serves not just the 1% but all of humanity. The common criticism of OWS amongst my peers is that they lack a solution to the problems or measurable goals they want to achieve.
ReplyDeleteI think we all know the main source of the economic turmoil we see today is the Federal Reserve System that creates money out of thin air! I believe putting an end to this should be the priority.
Thoughts?
“For the most part they are spoiled rotten brats who took out huge loans to pay for four years of self-indulgence at some over-rated liberal arts college. Somehow, they were able to spend a few months in the fall camping out and protesting against the working class while not working themselves. They are in that upper 1% who do not have to work.” -- Don Suber, The Daily Mail
ReplyDelete"In truth, the OWS protestors are only skirmishing over the distribution of the spoils system they claim to abhor. Their demands for higher tax rates on the “1%” shows their desire to join those who pillage through the power of government. They call it social justice. But its credo is the same as the crony capitalists who exploit the American people through government handouts: Both seek to use political power to satisfy their needs by taking the income of others rather than through voluntary exchanges. In each case, its true name is “greed.” -- Social Justice, Greed And The Occupy Wall Street Movement
“On Sunday, October 23, a meeting was held at 60 Wall Street. Six leaders discussed what to do with the half-million dollars that had been donated to their organization, since, in their estimation, the organization was incapable of making sound financial decisions. The proposed solution was not to spend the money educating their co-workers or stimulating more active participation by improving the organization’s structures and tactics. Instead, those present discussed how they could commandeer the $500,000 for their new, more exclusive organization. No, this was not the meeting of any traditional influence on Wall Street. These were six of the leaders of Occupy Wall Street." -- Global Research
"The movement’s PR efforts drew derision from Fraser P. Seitel, managing partner of Emerald Partners and author of The Practice of Public Relations. OWS, he says, has “botched an opportunity to capture public opinion and achieve something. Americans, by every measure, distrust the politicians who run Washington and lead major institutions. So public opinion was ripe for the plucking.” However, the movement blew it by having no overriding purpose, stated goals, or visible leadership, he says, and it is increasingly perceived as a bunch of publicity-hungry complainers intent on disrupting others who are making a living. “Occupy Wall Street is right about one thing,” he says. “The whole world is watching. And it’s generally repulsed by what it’s seen.” -- PR Daily
ReplyDelete"Almost every organization present at OWS is explicitly communist or socialist. Almost every piece of literature being handed out is explicitly communist or socialist. I don’t mean half, and I don’t mean the overwhelming majority — I mean almost all of it. Yes, there are the usual union goons trying to figure out how to get OWS to do the bidding of the AFL-CIO and the Democratic party, and the usual smattering of New Age goo (the “Free Empathy” table) and po-mo Left wackiness (animal-rights nuts), the inevitable Let’s-Eradicate-Israel crowd (“Free Palestine, from the river to the sea!”). But, that being said, almost every organized enterprise and piece of printed material I have encountered has been socialist or communist. It’s been a long time since I saw anybody peddling books by Lenin. It’s been a long time since anybody told me the Ukrainians had it coming. When the protesters were rallying to march to Times Square, out went the call: “Follow the red flag!” Which is what they did, literally and, I fear, figuratively. -- NRO
The protesters have a distinct ideology and are bound by a deep commitment to radical left-wing policies. On Oct. 10 and 11, Arielle Alter Confino, a senior researcher at my polling firm, interviewed nearly 200 protesters in New York's Zuccotti Park. Our findings probably represent the first systematic random sample of Occupy Wall Street opinion.
Our research shows clearly that the movement doesn't represent unemployed America and is not ideologically diverse. Rather, it comprises an unrepresentative segment of the electorate that believes in radical redistribution of wealth, civil disobedience and, in some instances, violence. Half (52%) have participated in a political movement before, virtually all (98%) say they would support civil disobedience to achieve their goals, and nearly one-third (31%) would support violence to advance their agenda.
An overwhelming majority of demonstrators supported Barack Obama in 2008. Now 51% disapprove of the president while 44% approve, and only 48% say they will vote to re-elect him in 2012, while at least a quarter won't vote. ...
What binds a large majority of the protesters together—regardless of age, socioeconomic status or education—is a deep commitment to left-wing policies: opposition to free-market capitalism and support for radical redistribution of wealth, intense regulation of the private sector, and protectionist policies to keep American jobs from going overseas. -- WSJ
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.”
ReplyDeleteThat’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 ...
At heart, Oakland’s occupiers and worthless political class want more of the same fix that has made America the Brokest Nation in History: They expect to live as beneficiaries of a prosperous Western society without making any contribution to the productivity necessary to sustain it. -- Mark Steyn
I find it unfair to point fingers at the opportunists taking advantage of crowd and inciting violence. Perhaps, the "one bad apple spoils the bunch" adage rings true, but the violence and vandalism are not the defining characteristics of the OWS movement. The movement is about wealth disparity, not free-riding and taking advantage of government for a free lunch.
DeleteI am a classmate of Chris and was in Cheryl Wade's class with him. I even joined him to the Zuccotti Park protest in the Fall. Did I go back with him after that? No, I didn't. Do I feel as strongly about the movement as him? Perhaps not. I do, however, understand the plight of the OWS movement. My family is from Egypt, and the movement there is something I have followed closely, and received first-hand reports from friends and family there. During the protests, people were looting and vandalizing and simply causing mayhem. It does not discredit the efforts of those people in bringing justice. The people of Egypt are hungry, and they needed to do what had to be done to put food on the table and get their voices heard. I never condone violence, but sometimes civil disobedience is necessary to be heard. The same applies to OWS. If OWS was able to be simply glossed-over by those they are trying to reach, why would anyone care to take notice? Is that not the entire purpose of a protest?
OWS is far from perfect, but its aim is admirable. My goal in writing this is not to sway you to agree with me politically. I would, however, like to you look at the entirety of the movement, and not just individual actions of those bad apples mentioned earlier. No one is trying to defeat free-market capitalism, but there is something fundamentally wrong where so much wealth and power can be controlled by so few, while others who try to make a living, cannot. OWS wants changes to the current system, not a new system entirely.
"I cannot help fearing that men may reach a point where they look on every new theory as a danger, every innovation as a toilsome trouble, every social advance as a first step toward revolution, and that they may absolutely refuse to move at all." -- Alexis de Tocqueville
"Occupy" CPAC protestors have no idea what CPAC is. They're told not to talk by their union handlers.
ReplyDeleteThe idea that this is a grassroots movement is simply a joke.
Chris' comments about OWS' distance from the Democrats is right. This observation is even supported by his critic, Che, and the info he shared from one commentator that reveals that a majority of Occupiers plan not to vote for President Obama in the fall. And, as for Chris' observations about the racism of many in the Tea Party - just go to the link that follows for just a few vivid examples of that racism.
ReplyDeletewww.youtube.com/watch?v=S38VioxnBaI
"And, as for Chris' observations about the racism of many in the Tea Party - just go to the link that follows for just a few vivid examples of that racism." -- Cheryl Wade.
ReplyDeleteDemonstrators from the Occupy Wall Street movement threw condoms on Catholic schoolgirls, refused to allow a Catholic priest to give a closing prayer ... -- Fox News
Police arrested four people in connection with the evening’s occupation of the empty Cathedral Hill Hotel at Van Ness Avenue and Geary Street. “Once they got inside, some of the protesters made it to the roof top and were throwing Bibles at the officers,” Manfredi said. -- SF Chronicle
There’s no longer room at the inn at a Manhattan church that’s sheltering Occupy Wall Streeters after a holy vessel disappeared from the altar last week. In Brooklyn, at another church housing OWS protesters, an occupier urinated on a cross, according to Rabbi Chaim Gruber, who has angrily abandoned the OWS movement. -- NY Post
St Paul’s Cathedral has been desecrated by vandalism, human waste and discarded drug needles since the arrival of anti-capitalist protesters outside, court papers allege ... graffiti, including a sacrilegious message, had been scratched and painted on the building and human waste had even been found inside it ... graffti ... on to the great west doors of the cathedral, the chapter house door and most notably a sacrilegious message painted on the restored pillars of the west portico ... ‘Human defecation has occurred in the west portico entrance and inside the cathedral on several occasions.’-- Daily Mail
The recent executive director of the controversial Council on American-Islamic Relations’ South Florida chapter is a founder and spokesman of Occupy Miami ... He has led hate-filled anti-Israel protests in which participants were filmed wearing Hamas paraphernalia while chanting “Nuke Israel” and "Go back to the oven"– a reference to Jews being killed in the Holocaust. Malik has been widely quoted in the Florida news media in recent weeks speaking for Occupy Miami. The Miami Herald identified Malik as one of the organizers of Occupy’s Miami’s downtown campsite headquarters … WND
ReplyDeleteOccupier - "The Zionist Jews Need To Be Run Out of This Country"
Hate at Occupy Wall Street
"I think that the Zionist Jews, who are running these big banks and our Federal Reserve, which is not run by the federal government . . . they need to be run out of this country." On the American Nazi Party website, leader Rocky Suhayda voiced support for 'Occupy Wall St.' and asked, “Who hold the wealth and power in this country? The Judeo-Capitalists. Who is therefore the #1 enemy who makes this filth happen? The Judeo-Capitalists. One of the people reportedly responsible for organizing the 'Occupy Wall St.' protests, Adbusters editor Kalle Lasn, has a history of perpetuating conspiracy theories that say the Jews control America’s foreign policies.
On Monday, the Anti-Defamation League also called for OWS to condemn "biggoted statements" among their participants. -- NewsMax
"Hitlers Bankers" - Anti-semitism at OWS
Occupy Wall Street Protester Wants 911 9/11s
Racist and anti-semite, Jamarhl "Kill Whitey" Crawford, allowed to speak at Occupy Boston -- Verum Serum
ReplyDeleteThe foremost authority on National Socialism in America has this to say about “Occupy”:
[Their Caps]
What is really MISSING – is the “MOVEMENT” from these popular protests – its time to pull WN heads out of their collective ass’s, and JOIN IN the attack on Judeo-Capitalism. What do you suggest? That WN Working Class White people DEFEND the Judeo-Capitalists? IF the “movement” wasn’t so PATHETIC it would be OUT THERE – LEADING these protests! The fact that its these “lefties” as you call them, who are picking up the ball and running with it – only shows how much more in tune THEY are with the fed up masses of White Workers, than the fossilized, reactionary “right-wing”. WHO holds the WEALTH and POWER in this country – the JUDEO-CAPITALISTS. WHO is therefore the #1 ENEMY who makes all this filth happen – the JUDEO-CAPITALISTS. WHO therefore do WN need to FIGHT? My heart is right there with these people, perhaps someday the “movement” will SHOW the same COURAGE and DEDICATION that these people OUT THERE FIGHTING are SHOWING! -- American Nazi Party
Solidarity with “Occupy Wall Street” ... A big challenge for the CPUSA and left, progressive movements is to link these demonstrations with the labor led all-people’s coalition and help deepen understanding that the path to progress must be through electoral and political action including defeating Republican Tea Party reaction in 2012 ... To have a positive impact, the CPUSA and YCL must be a part of the “Occupy” movement, participating at every level and building greater local support for the actions among labor and progressive forces. -- CPUSA
Occupy Wall Street - Bringing the lunatics together under the banner of HATE!
"And, as for Chris' observations about the racism of many in the Tea Party - just go to the link that follows for just a few vivid examples of that racism." -- Cheryl Wade.
ReplyDelete"The accusation of racism, once a substantive charge of moral corruption, is increasingly a facile tool of political cynicism." -- Peter Kirsanow
It should be noted that several of the most vile signs which appear in the video that Cheryl Wade has linked to, including the "Witch Doctor" sign, actually belong to supporters of Lyndon LaRouche, a far-left bigot who has run for president - as a Democrat - numerous times. LaRouche followers have also appeared at OWS protests and encampments carrying the same vile protest signs. As far as I am aware he is not legitimately associated with either movement and it is deliberately misleading to suggest that his followers represent evidence of Tea Party racism.
Also, to suggest that disagreement with the President Obama over his policies at home or his actions abroad is evidence of racism is both rediculous and hypocritical. How soon the left forgets about it's own behavior during the last administration:Video: Leftists compared Bush to Hitler
Properly understood, the lefts constant use of the charge of racism, without clear evidence of any actual racist activity, can be seen as a racist act in itself. Such accusations are an attack, not on their opponents arguments, but on their opponents humanity and decency and they should be rejected.
“Oreos,” “Uncle Toms,” “spook at the door”: it turns out people are “lobbing” racial slurs! When Johnson speaks of the assumption that “the Republican Party is for whites and the Democratic Party is for blacks,” does anyone doubt the accuracy of his perception? ... It is Democrats, not Republicans, who hold this race-based assumption. And it doesn’t actually go both ways. No white American today suffers the indignity of being labeled a “traitor” to his race; the supposedly liberal assumption is that blacks, and only blacks, are expected to think a certain way because of the color of their skin. -- WSJ
Video: Black Tea Partiers
Racism is not a factor driving conservative opposition to President Barack Obama, according to the results of focus groups conducted by Democracy Corps, a Democratic organization, released on Friday. -- Politico
ReplyDeleteA new analysis of political signs displayed at a tea party rally in Washington last month reveals that the vast majority of activists expressed narrow concerns about the government's economic and spending policies and steered clear of the racially charged anti-Obama messages that have helped define some media coverage of such events. -- Washington Post
Black CNN reporter finds little racism at Tea Partys: Reporter's notebook: What really happens at Tea Party rallies, CNN
Point to ONE, just ONE, Confederate flag. Point to one sign, out of the thousands here that is racially insensitive.
Conservative Mychal Massie, chairman of the black leadership network Project 21, is calling on liberal African American leaders to back up their charges of racism against the Tea Party. Massie has challenged the Rev. Al Sharpton, National Urban League President Marc Morial, and former D.C. Congressional Delegate Walter Fauntroy to a debate over the Tea Party’s alleged bigotry. “With their divisive rhetoric, these men and those like them do incalculable harm to the cohesiveness of our communities. It is time they be held accountable,” Massie said. “I felt a debate would be the fairest method for them to explain and defend their comments. As to their silence thus far, it would seem they are either incapable of defending their position, fearful of having to defend it ... -- Daily Caller
ReplyDeleteWashington, DC – As the NAACP plans to use their group's prestige to bash the tea party movement, members of the Project 21 black leadership network are urging delegates at the NAACP's national convention not to turn the NAACP into a pawn for progressive political bosses.
"As a frequent speaker at tea party rallies around the country, I can assure the NAACP that the tea party movement's concerns are about President Obama's policies and not his race," said Project 21 fellow Deneen Borelli. "I'm deeply concerned that the NAACP is being used as a political tool to do the dirty work of the progressive movement. Instead of criticizing tea parties, the NAACP would be better served denouncing the racist comments made by a member of the New Black Panther Party and their voter intimidation outside a Philadelphia polling place in the last presidential election." -- National Center for Public Policy Research
Conservative Black Leaders Defend Tea Party Against Charges of Racism at Press Conference
In Northern Virginia, many of the immigrants who have gravitated to the tea party have roots in socialist countries and are intensely afraid that the U.S. is headed down the same path. They embrace the tea party’s small government, socially conservative messages ... “If the immigrants understood what was happening in America there would be a revolt against those politicians,” said Muñoz, who became a citizen in 2008. Why do immigrants leave their country? Because they don’t have opportunity and they don’t have freedom, because politicians control everything,” he said. “We come to America and we are going to have the same crap? Then we might as well go back there.” Genaro Pedroarias, the national committeeman of the Republican National Hispanic Assembly of Virginia, said the tea party is a natural fit for many of northern Virginia’s immigrants from countries like Bolivia, Ecuador and Nicaragua. "Most Hispanics who come to this country come here to flee socialistic and oppressive regimes,” said Pedroarias, who is Cuban. “They are some of the most vibrant members of the tea party.” -- Roll Call
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteLeftists Crashed Tea Parties Dressed Offensively and Carrying Racist Signs In An Effort to Discredit the Movement
ReplyDeleteIn recent weeks, Levin announced his intention to embarrass Tea Partiers by attending their rallies dressed as Adolf Hitler, carrying signs bearing racist, sexist and anti-gay epithets and acting as offensively as possible ... Levin called on his supporters to collect the Social Security numbers — among other personal identifying information — about as many Tea Party supporters as possible at the numerous rallies that took place last Thursday. "The more data we can mine from the Tea Partiers, the more mayhem we can cause with it!!!!" he wrote. -- Fox News
Tea Partiers used signs to identify left-wing infiltrators and to encourage them to leave.
Unable to find evidence of real racism, Think Progress decided to manufacture some. Here's a picture of one such infilitrator taken by a tea partier. Thousands of leftists across the country came to Tea Party events with signs like these hoping to paint the Tea Party as racist in the minds of the public.
Will you allow that some of the miscreants who were present at "occupy" camps were "infiltrators" who were seeking to detract from the movement, or create the impression that the movement itself is something it is not?
DeleteA major Republican presidential candidate, Ron Paul, has published openly racist remarks with his newsletters. Further, he has not retracted these remarks, and insisted instead that they were written by someone else without his knowledge. If the Republican party opposes racism, why was he not broadly condemned by the GOP?
DeleteMaking absurd claims that the President isn't an American citizen and claiming he's a Muslim are all well documented slurs by elements of the GOP, including elected officials. What is the intent behind this language, if not to appeal to a large section of voters within the Republican fold who would agree with such absurd statements? Clearly the GOP expects many of its constituents to believe such rhetoric, and the GOP expects to profit from these same voters by stoking these irrational beliefs sufficiently to get them to the polls. If this is not "racism", what is it?
Delete"Will you allow that some of the miscreants who were present at "occupy" camps were "infiltrators" ..." -- Anonymous
DeleteDo you have actual evidence of that happening? Or, are you just asking me to affirm your own paranoid suspicions? And if there are "infiltrators" at OWS, are you suggesting that some conservative group sent them into the camps for the purpose of discrediting the "Occupy" movement in the way that the left clearly did with the Tea Party? Again, any evidence?
"A major Republican presidential candidate, Ron Paul, has published openly racist remarks with his newsletters." -- Anonymous
I am not a Ron Paul supporter, and I am unfamiliar with the exact comments that he is alleged to have made. If things are as you say they are I would not hesitate to condemn him for them. Both parties though have fringe candidates whose opinions do not reflect the vast majority of their core constituency. Al Sharpton has made some extremely racist remarks, and I do not see him being ostracized from the Democrat Party.
The Democrat Party was the pro-slavery party. It was the party of the KKK, segregation and Jim Crow. Those racist Democrats were not conservatives, they were progressives and New Dealers. They were a very large part of the coalition that elected Wilson, FDR, Truman and even JFK. They fought the advance of civil rights legislation under Republican President Dwight Eisenhower and conservative Republican Senator Everett Dirksen, whose critical contributions to the civil rights movement has been shamefully ignored. In the 26 major civil rights votes after 1933, a majority of Democrats opposed civil rights legislation in over 80 percent of the votes. By contrast, the Republican majority favored civil rights in over 96 percent of the votes. And that included the most conservative members.
Given their undeniably ugly history, many Democrats have tried to argued that the two parties have somehow switched constituencies since the Republicans have won the support of so much of the south. This, again, is a lie, as Gerard Alexander explains in this Washington Post article: Conservatism does not equal racism. So why do many liberals assume it does?
The American playwright, and former leftist, David Mamet recently wrote of his change of political heart: “I look back upon my Liberal political beliefs with a sort of wonder—as another exercise in self-involvement—rewarding myself for some superiority I could not logically describe.” -- David Mamet, The Secret Knowledge: On the Dismantling of American Culture
I think that this is true of most liberals, they assume a moral superiority, which they insist is reflected in their positions, and which must be juxtaposed against the evil of their opponents. Any misstep by their opponents they then ascribe to some sinister plot or moral failing, while their own missteps are written off as good intentions gone bad or a temporary moral lapse which is not representative of their true character.
"Making absurd claims that the President isn't an American citizen and claiming he's a Muslim are all well documented slurs by elements of the GOP, including elected officials." -- Anonymous
DeleteI am certainly not willing to agree that referring to someone as a "muslim" is a slur. It may be inaccurate, but I view the vast majority of muslims as honorable people so, I don't know how it could be considered a slur to be called a muslim. As for questioning the presidents citizenship, I agree that that is absurd, but the idea was originally put forward by supporters of the Clinton campaign during the Democrat primaries. Are they all racists too? Were they trying to appeal to some larger group of racist Democrat voters. I don't remember Hillary calling a press conference in order to condemn them. Does that make her a racist?
You see, once you go down this road you have be aware that it is a two way street. I could give you a list of actions and statements from Democrats and other leftists and insist that you disavow all of them while insinuating that these statements suggest something larger about anyone who would indentify with the Democrat Party. I could suggest that the mere presence, in the fold of the Democrat Party, of certain fringe actors renders all of the Democrats arguments illegitimate, just as you are trying to do here. Of course, that would be equally absurd since an argument, regardless of who makes it, must stand on its own.
che is dead (and other blog commentators):
ReplyDeletewhile factual arguments and assertions are welcome and encouraged on the Corporate Justice Blog, personal attacks are not welcome in our community of thinkers and commentators. free flowing exchange of ideas and viewpoints is the order of the day at the Corporate Justice Blog.
any posts that contain personal attacks will be deleted by the blog administrator. if in removing personal attacks factual content is simultaneously deleted, commentators are invited to re-post the factual content leaving the personal attacks aside.
on this particular thread, my own view is that radical elements, that are both racist and classless, are present in both the tea party and the occupy wall street movement. i see little value in arguing that one movement is more racist or more co-opted than the other. in both cases, evidence exists to suggest that we are not a post-racial country.
One notorious example of identity cloaking, resulting in a fake blog, was exposed when Edelman, an international public relations firm, created a fake blog in 2006 called Walmarting Across America.[2] It was purportedly written by two Wal-Mart "enthusiasts" who decided to journey across the United States in an RV, blogging about the experience as they visited Wal-Marts along the way. While two people actually did travel across the United States in an RV, the publicity stunt was revealed to be paid for by Wal-Mart, a client of Edelman.
ReplyDeleteIn this way, a fake blog is akin to industry-supported "astroturf" efforts that pose as legitimate grassroots activity, as identified by groups such as PR Watch, which investigates the origins of so-called grassroots organizations." -Wikipedia
Fake blogs are corrupted forms of public relations, which as a discipline demands transparency and honesty, according to the Public Relations Society of America's code of ethics and the Word of Mouth Marketing Association's code of ethics. Authenticity and transparency are important in social networking and blogging, as these codes of ethics attest. The UK Chartered Institute of Public Relations' social media guidelines cite the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 and state that both astroturfing and fake blogs are not permitted.[1]
ReplyDeleteAs social networking tools gain in popularity, corporations and special-interest groups legitimately use their own blogs to promote company agendas without cloaking their identities (one such example is http://www.blogsouthwest.com, a blog sponsored by Southwest Airlines and written by its employees).
Dear Chris, I regret to inform you that this creditable and respectable academic blog has been attacked by a textbook "flogger." Seeing as "Che is dead" posts on average every 4 minutes and has very little personal input to add to their "findings" i suspect that you are being attacked by a masked blogger promoting an alternative agenda. Please read below for more general information about such social media corruption:
ReplyDelete"A fake blog (sometimes shortened to flog or referred to as a flack blog) is an electronic communication form that appears to originate from a credible, non-biased source, but which in fact is created by a company or organization for the purpose of marketing a product, service, or political viewpoint. The purpose of a fake blog is to inspire viral marketing or create an internet meme that generates traffic and interest in a product, much the same as astroturfing (a "fake grassroots" campaign).
Dear Chris,
ReplyDeleteI regret to inform you that this creditable and respectable academic blog has been attacked by a textbook "flogger." Seeing as "Che is dead" posts on average every 4 minutes and has very little personal input to add to their "findings" i suspect that you are being attacked by a masked blogger promoting an alternative agenda. Please read below for more general information about such social media corruption:
"A fake blog (sometimes shortened to flog or referred to as a flack blog) is an electronic communication form that appears to originate from a credible, non-biased source, but which in fact is created by a company or organization for the purpose of marketing a product, service, or political viewpoint. The purpose of a fake blog is to inspire viral marketing or create an internet meme that generates traffic and interest in a product, much the same as astroturfing (a "fake grassroots" campaign).
Dear Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteYou really do not know what you are talking about. I've saved links to stories, like those above, because so many people I've come across seem to be completely ignorant of the other - that is the non-leftist - point of view. All of those links go to very credible sources.
Why don't you try actually reading the stories and watching the videos and then dealing with the arguments that they present instead of trying to dismiss them with some gibberish about "fake blogs". As for having "very little personal input to add to their "findings" , what is exactly that you are contributing? Do you have something to say about OWS or the Tea Party? Do you have a link to a story or a video that is relevant? If not, why are you commenting at all?
Will you allow that some of the miscreants who were present at "occupy" camps were "infiltrators" who were seeking to detract from the movement, or create the impression that the movement itself is something it is not?
ReplyDeleteA major Republican presidential candidate, Ron Paul, has published openly racist remarks with his newsletters. Further, he has not retracted these remarks, and insisted instead that they were written by someone else without his knowledge. If the Republican party opposes racism, why was he not broadly condemned by the GOP?
ReplyDeleteSee above.
DeleteI agree with the sentiment that it is futile to argue which side is "more racist" or "more extreme". Both ends of the political spectrum have radical views that run counter to promoting actual solutions. I do, however, think the OWS movement has brought the growing problem of income inequality to the forefront of public debate. Even thought the debate has slowed as of late (mostly because the media has deemed it prudent to let it die for a while before bringing it back to even higher ratings), the OWS sentiment will resurface again in the general election, especially if it is a Romney v. Obama ticket.
ReplyDeleteThe income equality debate in this country is just beginning. It will continue to grow in importance with the Presidential Election cycle and tax reform looming in the distance. Like most political movements, the more fervent and extreme voices drown out the moderate segment, but the moderate majority's silence should not be seem as indifference. The OWS movement has been hijacked for the time being by factions from the extreme left which has damaged its credibility, but the movement's core message has resonated with large segments of the American public. The terms 99% and 1% now have lasting significance as they are synonymous with income inequality and readily recognizable to a majority of the country. It has brought the frustrations of the declining middle class to the forefront of national debate. This has been the greatest achievement of the movement in my eyes.