Some Thoughts on the Occupy Wall Street Movement

Some Thoughts on the Occupy Wall Street Movement

Suppose that a great commotion arises in the street about something, let us say a lamp-post, which many influential persons desire to pull down. A grey-clad monk, who is the spirit of the Middle Ages, is approached upon the matter, and begins to say, in the arid manner of the Schoolmen, "Let us first of all consider, my brethren, the value of Light. If Light be in itself good--" At this point he is somewhat excusably knocked down. All the people make a rush for the lamp-post, the lamp-post is down in ten minutes, and they go about congratulating each other on their unmediaeval practicality. But as things go on they do not work out so easily. Some people have pulled the lamp-post down because they wanted the electric light; some because they wanted old iron; some because they wanted darkness, because their deeds were evil. Some thought it not enough of a lamp-post, some too much; some acted because they wanted to smash municipal machinery; some because they wanted to smash something. And there is war in the night, no man knowing whom he strikes. So, gradually and inevitably, to-day, to-morrow, or the next day, there comes back the conviction that the monk was right after all, and that all depends on what is the philosophy of Light. Only what we might have discussed under the gas-lamp, we now must discuss in the dark.

G. K. Chesterton, "Heretics", 1908

Now, I happent to be of the opinion that the "Organize Wall Street" movement is being orchestrated and encouraged by some rather nasty people toward some nefarious end. I may be wrong in substance but, as Chesterton points out, it matters little. Human nature being what it is (sin-filled and depraved) even the most benign interpretation of the OWS movement reveals an undercurrent of lawless anarchy which can only end badly for those on the street and our society as a whole.

One need only recall the French Revolution is a more accurate template for OWS than the American Revolution and then look to the consequenses of that period in history. The French Revolution was led by libertarian idealists resisting an irresponsible and oppressive regime. It was not organized by nasty people for nefarious purposes. It had far more legal and moral justification than the OWS movement. But when the mob acted the world crumbled. It turned upon itself with unprecidented savagery and destroyed everything in its path. The mad thrill of pure destruction.

When the madness reached its apogee and he horror (the Terror led by Mm Guillotine and the Mob) was universally appalled by the rank and file citizens, in stepped the "Strong Man", Napoleon, with his cannon and a "whiff of grapeshot", stepped to the forefront and seized power. His ambition and hubris led him to attempt the conquest of Europe with all its consequent death and destruction.

And that is the fruit of the misguided idealists. The "nasty people of nefarious ends" have viewed and calculated this fruit as a necessary and desirable price for the attainment of their goals. So, even if I am paranoid and wrong about the nasty people orchestrating the OWS movement that should not be cause for relief.

Comment

You need to be a member of The Wittenberg Trail to add comments!

Join The Wittenberg Trail

Comment by Dave Gosse on February 28, 2012 at 11:09pm: Bailout for OWS?

Posted by Jacob Laksin

Bankruptcy makes for strange bedfellows. During its brief spell on the national stage, the Occupy Wall Street movement raged against rich corporations – “corporate fascists” in OWS parlance. But as the national spotlight has faded – and as cash from progressive donors has dried up – the movement’s soak-the-rich agitators are set to welcome a financing boost from the same “1 percent” they once denounced.

OWS’s corporate benefactor is the so-called Movement Resource Group, a funding venture backed by the left-wing founders of Ben and Jerry’s ice cream as well as the former manager of grunge group Nirvana, among others. The group has raised some $300,000 so far, and plans to raise around $1.8 million to revive the moribund movement.

Ben and Jerry’s involvement in the cause is entirely in keeping with the company’s activist giving. Driven by its founders’ Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield’s radical politics, the ice cream giant has long funded extreme left-wing causes through its Ben and Jerry’s Foundation. Dispensing funds to a broad spectrum of left-wing groups, from ACORN to the Tides Foundation, the ice cream makers have never seen a contradiction between their commercial success and their intense loathing of free-market capitalism. In recent years, for instance, their foundation has endorsed the “Earth Charter,” a document that blames capitalism on the world’s environmental, social and economic ills. The charter declares that “the dominant patterns of production and consumption are causing environmental devastation, the depletion of resources, and a massive extinction of species” and blames capitalism for causing the “gap between rich and poor.”

[...]

To be sure, that opposition to corporate money in politics doesn’t seem to apply to Ben and Jerry’s, which is now trying to spend millions to influence the political process through OWS. Nor, seemingly, does it apply to Unilever, the global conglomerate that owns Ben and Jerry’s and which spent a million dollars on political lobbying in 2010.

[...]

Still, the fact remains that without that bailout, OWS looks likely to disappear from the political scene altogether. The movement that drew media in flocks has become a distant memory. And nothing better underscores OWS’s irrelevance than the fact that the self-styled anti-corporate, anti-capitalist movement may soon be dependent on corporate cash to keep it alive.

Read more

Comment by James Robertson on February 28, 2012 at 12:32pm

Comment by Dave Gosse on February 28, 2012 at 11:47am: Georgetown co-ed: Please pay for us to have sex … We’re going broke...
posted at 1:55 pm on February 28, 2012 by Tina Korbe

At a hearing of the House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee yesterday, a single witness — Georgetown law student and “reproductive rights activist” Sandra Fluke — told sympathetic policy-makers that the administration’s so-called contraception mandate should stand … because her peers are going broke buying birth control.

“Forty percent of the female students at Georgetown Law reported to us that they struggled financially as a result of this policy (Georgetown student insurance not covering contraception),” Fluke reported.

It costs a female student $3,000 to have protected sex over the course of her three-year stint in law school, according to her calculations.

“Without insurance coverage, contraception, as you know, can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school,” Fluke told the hearing.

Craig Bannister at CNSNews.com did the math — and discovered that these co-eds, assuming they’re using the cheapest possible contraception, must be having unprotected sex about three times a day every day to incur that kind of expense. What Fluke is arguing, then, is that her fellow law students have a right to consequence-free sex whenever, wherever. Why, exactly, especially if it costs other people something? When I can’t pay for something, I do without it. Fortunately, in the case of contraception, women can make lifestyle choices that render it unnecessary.

At one point, Fluke mentions a friend who felt “embarrassed and powerless” when she learned her insurance didn’t cover contraception. Can you imagine how proud and empowered that same friend would be if she learned she has the ability to resist her own sexual urges? We can only assume she doesn’t know that because Fluke and she both labor under the illusion that contraception is a medical necessity.

Some little part of Fluke must recognize that it’s not … because she sought to bolster her argument with an example of an illness in which contraception might be a medically necessary treatment. Another friend of hers, she said, has polycystic ovarian syndrome, for which contraception is a common treatment. Some insurance programs that don’t cover contraception normally would nevertheless cover it as a treatment for PCOS — but other insurance programs wouldn’t. Fluke makes it sound like contraception is the only treatment for PCOS. In fact, it isn’t — and contraception is prescribed as a treatment only when the woman also wants to contracept. Fluke says her friend is a lesbian — and so wouldn’t need contraception. Why didn’t she opt for any of the other treatments, then?

At the end of her testimony, Fluke spoke in strong language of her resentment of university administrators and others who suggest she should have chosen to attend a different university that would have offered student insurance that does cover contraception — even if that other university wasn’t quite as prestigious as Georgetown.

“We refuse to pick between a quality education and our health and we resent that, in the 21st Century, anyone thinks it’s acceptable to ask us to make that choice simply because we are women,” Fluke said.

Ms. Fluke, I resent that you think women are incapable of controlling themselves, of sacrificing temporary pleasure for the sake of long-term success. You make us sou

Comment by Dave Gosse on February 28, 2012 at 7:18am: George Osborne: UK has run out of money
The Government 'has run out of money' and cannot afford debt-fuelled tax cuts or extra spending, George Osborne has admitted.

In a stark warning ahead of next month’s Budget, the Chancellor said there was little the Coalition could do to stimulate the economy.

Mr Osborne made it clear that due to the parlous state of the public finances the best hope for economic growth was to encourage businesses to flourish and hire more workers.

“The British Government has run out of money because all the money was spent in the good years,” the Chancellor said. “The money and the investment and the jobs need to come from the private sector.”

Mr Osborne’s bleak assessment echoes that of Liam Byrne, the former chief secretary to the Treasury, who bluntly joked that Labour had left Britain broke when he exited the Government in 2010.

He left David Laws, his successor, a one-line note saying: “Dear Chief Secretary, I’m afraid to tell you there’s no money left”.

Mr Osborne is under severe pressure to boost growth, amid signs the economy is slipping back into a recession.

The Institute of Fiscal Studies has urged him to consider emergency tax cuts in the Budget to reduce the risk of a prolonged economic slump.

But the Chancellor yesterday said he would stand firm on his effort to balance the books by refusing to borrow money. “Any tax cut would have to be paid for,” Mr Osborne told Sky News. “In other words there would have to be a tax rise somewhere else or a spending reduction.

“In other words what we are not going to do in this Budget is borrow more money to either increase spending or cut taxes.”

Read more

Comment by James Robertson on February 28, 2012 at 3:25am: Double hypocrisy - a socialist politician.

Comment by Dave Gosse on February 27, 2012 at 6:04pm: Hypocrisy-R-Us, another socialist uses a tax fiddle to protect his extravagant income while demonizing "the wealthy". Suitable for thee but not for me...

Could you follow Ken Livingstone’s lead and pay 20pc tax on £232,00...

By Ian Cowie

Ken Livingstone, who attacked tax avoiders as “rich b*****ds” who should “not be all...

Now rising numbers of people who, like Ken, believe they have better uses for their income than to pay 40pc or 50pc tax, are asking if they can follow the socialist firebrand’s example.

Andrew Gilligan revealed in The Sunday Telegraph that Mr Livingstone, who is Labour’s candidate for the London mayoralty, earned £232,000 in 2009, the first year after his defeat to Boris Johnson at the last mayoral election. The money, from personal appearances, speechmaking and hosting a radio show, was paid directly into a new company set up by Mr Livingstone and his then partner, now wife, Emma Beal, who are sole shareholders.

Accountants shown the documents by The Sunday Telegraph say the move appears designed to allow Mr Livingstone to pay corporation tax at 20pc, rather than income tax at up to 40pc.

Mr Livingstone has spoken out against tax avoiders, saying: “These rich b*****ds just don’t get it… No one should be allowed to vote in a British election, let alone sit in Parliament, unless they pay their full share of tax “Cameron’s problem is too many of his team have become super-rich by exploiting every tax fiddle… [We should] sweep away tax scams and everybody should pay tax at the same rate on earnings and other income.”

[...]

Read more

Comment by Dave Gosse on February 27, 2012 at 5:54pm

Tax and Spending Issues

February 27, 2012

Fifty Percent Tax Rate Failing to Boost Revenues

Britain's Treasury received £10.35 billion (about $16.4 billion) in income tax payments from those paying by self-assessment last month, a drop of £509 million (about $807 million) compared with January 2011. Most other taxes produced higher revenues over the same period. The figures will add to pressure on the Coalition government to drop a new 50 percent rate amid fears it is forcing entrepreneurs to relocate abroad, says the Telegraph (U.K.).

The self-assessment returns from January, when most income tax is paid by the better-off, have been eagerly awaited by the Treasury and government ministers as they provide the first evidence of the success, or failure, of the new 50 percent rate.
It is the first year following the introduction of the 50 percent rate, which had been expected to boost tax revenues from self-assessment by more than £1 billion (about $1.6 billion).
Although the official statistics do not disclose how much money was paid at the 50 percent tax rate, the figures indicate that it is falling short of the money the levy was expected to raise.

A Treasury source said the relatively poor revenues from self-assessment returns were partly down to highly-paid individuals arranging their affairs to avoid paying the new rate.

Francesca Lagerberg, head of tax at Grant Thornton, an accountancy firm, said: "My guess is that because the 50 percent rate was flagged up in advance many taxpayers, particularly those with their own businesses, decided to extract dividends ahead of the change. It highlights the fact that high tax rates don't always deliver high tax revenues."

Source: Robert Winnett, and James Kirkup, "50 Percent Tax Rate 'Failing to Boost Revenues,'" Telegraph (U.K.), February 21, 2012.

For text:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/consumertips/tax...

Comment by Dave Gosse on February 27, 2012 at 3:35pm

DATE: February 15, 2012
TO: America
RE: The 99% Spring

Things should never have reached this point.

Every day, the American Dream seems a little farther away. More of our grandparents are being thrown from their homes. Our mothers and fathers can’t retire because their pension funds tanked. Our brothers and sisters are burdened by student loan debt. For our children, budget cuts have resulted in crumbling schools, skyrocketing class sizes, and teachers being denied the supports they need to do their best. Our friends and family are being denied collective bargaining rights in their workplaces and are falling further and further behind. Our neighbors are being poisoned by pollution in our air and water.

The numbers are staggering: in recent years, millions of jobs have been destroyed, homes foreclosed, and an unconscionable number of children live in poverty.

And worst of all: this is no accident. It is a result of rampant greed—the deliberate manipulation of our democracy and our economy by a tiny minority in the 1%, by those who amass ever more wealth and power at our expense.

We are at a crossroads as a country. We have a choice to make. Greater wealth for a few or opportunity for many. Tax breaks for the richest or a fair shot for the rest of us. A government that can be bought by the highest bidder, or a democracy that is truly of the people, by the people, and for the people.

The choice is in our hands. This spring, we will act on that choice and rise up in the tradition of our forefathers and foremothers. We will not be complicit with the suffering in our families for another year. We will prepare ourselves for sustained non-violent direct action.

From April 9-15 we will gather across America, 100,000 strong, in homes, places of worship, campuses and the streets to join together in the work of reclaiming our country. We will organize trainings to:

Tell the story of our economy: how we got here, who’s responsible, what a different future could look like, and what we can do about it
Learn the history of non-violent direct action, and
Get into action on our own campaigns to win change.

This spring we rise! We will reshape our country with our own hands and feet, bodies and hearts. We will take non-violent action in the spirit of Martin Luther King, Jr. and Gandhi to forge a new destiny one block, one neighborhood, one city, one state at a time.

We know great change is possible. We inherit a history of everyday people standing up for their own dignity, freedom, and self-determination, shaping our direction as a country. The seamstress in Alabama who launched a bus boycott. The farmers in New England and Virginia who imagined we could be a free nation. The workers in Flint, Michigan who occupied their plant to win collective bargaining rights. The farmworkers in California who liberated our fields. The women in New York who dreamed they could one day speak with equal voice. The mother who stood up in Love Canal to stop the poisoning of her community. And the students who risked their lives during Freedom Summer to register voters.

In the last year alone we watched the teachers and fire fighters of Wisconsin stand for the rights of workers. And we joined those who Occupied Wall Street, inspiring us to stand with the 99%.

We will rise this spring, because we DO hold these truths to be self evident—that all men and women are created equal, that we are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

Will you rise with us? Can we count on you to join us April 9th to 15th to stand with the 99% for America?