For 3 weeks now, protesters have converged on Wall Street under the banner of Occupy Wall Street. The protests began with a handful of hippies, college students and anarchists who demonstrated, chanted and marched near (the NYPD had blocked off Wall Street itself) Americas financial center. There were no clear demands, no leaders and no definition to the movement but there were some themes.
1. The banks are to blame - Nevermind that it's the politicians, from both party establishments who give the "banksters" the power and access. Also, they're not limiting their angst to those who are responsible for the crisies we face. Their calls are to bring down ALL of the banks. And not just bring down the institutions but "behead the bankers" too.
2. Capitalism is the problem - They're only partly right. Pure Capitalism could NOT have caused these problems, only crony Capitalism can. That's the corrupt, pay to play that we have seen throughout the years from the establishment progressives in both parties. Ask them what they'd replace Capitalism with and they'll say that they don't know BUT press them some and you will find them talking about things like " a more equitable system", "maximum salaries", "wealth redistribution" and "a system based on empathy".
3. If we don't go willingly, force us - While the organizers and spokespeople call for "non-violence" at the protest, the means to their fluid ends include the use of force. This force includes but is not limited to: beheading bankers who do not cooperate, forcing the wealthy to give "their excess" to the middle class and "taking down Capitalism".
Now, some of what these protesters are saying makes sense. They say it's time to "end the Fed" and return to sound money backed by gold and you know what, they are right but then they jump to "and we should bring down Capitalism too!" and we have to stop and say...No...don't bring it down, FIX IT! You see, this is the difference between the Wall Street protesters and the TEA Party.
The TEA Party began in 2009 with a call to return to the principles of American liberty through political and ethical reform. THIS is why it mirrored the American Revolution. The war against England came only as a last result and only after England had repeatedly murdered American colonists. Heck, some of our founders would have had us remain the King's subjects if only he'd listen to our grievances and act to rectify them. The TEA Party likewise didn't seek to destroy the American system of government or replace it. It sought to rebuild it and strengthen it by improving ethics, getting the fiscal house in order and returning the power of the government to the people where it belongs.
By contrast, the Occupy Wall Street protesters are seeking to tear down the current system, break the new bourgeoisie (as defined by the Marxists, the 19th century French would have combined the bourgeoisie (capitalists) and the aristocracy to create what we consider to be the "new bourgeoisie" today) and implement a centrally planned economic and governmental system. This is EXACTLY why it mirrors the French Revolution. The French saw what happened in America and the lower class, led by radicals, socialists and budding communists led a revolt that they intended to be based on the American Revolution. Americans like Thomas Paine and to a lesser extent Thomas Jefferson supported the early stages of the French Revolution because the fires of liberty burned so strong in them. The problem is that there was a difference, the American Revolution came about after an enlightenment and a religious awakening while the French Revolution was a result of chaotic anarchy. So while the French Revolution may have had the same goal of liberty as the American Revolution, the means were different and the devil is in the details. Even the details of the Occupy Wall Street protests mirror the French Revolution:
1. The banks are to blame - Nevermind that it's the politicians, from both party establishments who give the "banksters" the power and access. Also, they're not limiting their angst to those who are responsible for the crisies we face. Their calls are to bring down ALL of the banks. And not just bring down the institutions but "behead the bankers" too.
2. Capitalism is the problem - They're only partly right. Pure Capitalism could NOT have caused these problems, only crony Capitalism can. That's the corrupt, pay to play that we have seen throughout the years from the establishment progressives in both parties. Ask them what they'd replace Capitalism with and they'll say that they don't know BUT press them some and you will find them talking about things like " a more equitable system", "maximum salaries", "wealth redistribution" and "a system based on empathy".
3. If we don't go willingly, force us - While the organizers and spokespeople call for "non-violence" at the protest, the means to their fluid ends include the use of force. This force includes but is not limited to: beheading bankers who do not cooperate, forcing the wealthy to give "their excess" to the middle class and "taking down Capitalism".
Now, some of what these protesters are saying makes sense. They say it's time to "end the Fed" and return to sound money backed by gold and you know what, they are right but then they jump to "and we should bring down Capitalism too!" and we have to stop and say...No...don't bring it down, FIX IT! You see, this is the difference between the Wall Street protesters and the TEA Party.
The TEA Party began in 2009 with a call to return to the principles of American liberty through political and ethical reform. THIS is why it mirrored the American Revolution. The war against England came only as a last result and only after England had repeatedly murdered American colonists. Heck, some of our founders would have had us remain the King's subjects if only he'd listen to our grievances and act to rectify them. The TEA Party likewise didn't seek to destroy the American system of government or replace it. It sought to rebuild it and strengthen it by improving ethics, getting the fiscal house in order and returning the power of the government to the people where it belongs.
By contrast, the Occupy Wall Street protesters are seeking to tear down the current system, break the new bourgeoisie (as defined by the Marxists, the 19th century French would have combined the bourgeoisie (capitalists) and the aristocracy to create what we consider to be the "new bourgeoisie" today) and implement a centrally planned economic and governmental system. This is EXACTLY why it mirrors the French Revolution. The French saw what happened in America and the lower class, led by radicals, socialists and budding communists led a revolt that they intended to be based on the American Revolution. Americans like Thomas Paine and to a lesser extent Thomas Jefferson supported the early stages of the French Revolution because the fires of liberty burned so strong in them. The problem is that there was a difference, the American Revolution came about after an enlightenment and a religious awakening while the French Revolution was a result of chaotic anarchy. So while the French Revolution may have had the same goal of liberty as the American Revolution, the means were different and the devil is in the details. Even the details of the Occupy Wall Street protests mirror the French Revolution:
- Accusations tossed about with little or no proof or as out right lies - Like the protestor who claimed Chase Bank was "taking" his parents home when in fact they are choosing to sell it and move on their own.
- Storming or "Occupying" cities and buildings to force the system to shut down until their demands are met.
- Maximum earnings limits with the rest being redistributed to the populace by central planning of the government.
- Violence if their demands are not met - including the specific act of "beheading" which was a staple of the French Revolution and has been touted by supporters of the Occupy Wall Street protests.
The French revolution was provoked by the aristocrats (like today's 1% superrich) avoiding taxes, putting whole burden om the poor and för ing the king to borrow massive sums abroad. Of course people starter protesting and rising up, just like today.
ReplyDeleteOk "Anonymous" ( I hate it when people are too chicken to use their own name on their comments) #1 you're 1/2 wrong as usual, the French court moved to take up the demands of the people and the radicals leading the "movement" seized power by making unprovable accusations and inciting the "useful idiots" meaning the people who were uninformed about what was happening. With that said, the Aristocrats were indeed gouging the citizens, something that IS happening today BUT the difference is that today we are only holding the BUSINESS owners accountable and not the government officials who engage in the pay to play as well. Where are the calls for Obama, Dodd and Frank to step down for what amounts to Treason with the financial system? They don't exist and THEREIN lies your hypocrisy.
ReplyDelete#2 the richest 1% of Americans today (those making over $380,000 per year...pay attention successful small business owners to what these anonymous trolls say) currently pay 38% of all taxes in the U.S....the top 10% (those making over $113,000)? well they pay nearly 70% of all taxes while the bottom 50% of wage earners (those making under $33,000 annually )pay a whopping 2.7% of America's income tax. FURTHER more, these are numbers based on the AGI...AFTER the so-called "loopholes" are factored in. No matter how you slice it sir (or ma'am) the problem is not that the rich "don't pay their fair share" but rather that they've allowed people like you to continue kicking more of your own share onto them for too long. That's right, they should have long ago stood up and said NO MORE...no more spending, no more deficits (and that includes Republican Presidents) and no more bailouts to failing mega-banks run by political cronies.
The problem is rampant spending, NOT too little revenue BUT there is a way out. Get rid of the current tax system and put one in place that oh, I don't know, passes the founding fathers' smell test? A tax on consumption in PLACE of the income tax is a good way to meter this out, a better way would be simply to tax the states a percentage based on their population and then have the states recoup that money from their citizens in state taxes. Of course that would drive up local tax bills and the states would flip out when the bill came due BUT I guess I should admit, that's kind of the point of doing it that way.
What's happening on Wall Street is nothing short of what they did in the French Revolution. The uninformed are being shepherded by radicals and revolutionaries and are being used as pawns to accomplish the goals of the anti-capitalists. Nevermind that for over 120 years, despite a Civil War in the middle, pure capitalism ruled and America thrived. It wasn't until the Progressive Era (a.k.a. the Marxist/Socialist movement) that America ceased to be a leader in the world. Shockingly, when pure capitalism again led the way in the 20's, America prospered only to have Hoover and FDR institute more progressive ideology that drove the country into a depression that only World War II could save us from...
ReplyDeleteExcept that in the French case, there were large numbers of people from varying walks of life. This "occupy" crowd constitutes little more than the belly-button lint of society. Most of them are either old hippies or hipster degenerates who haven't even entered productive society yet. Imagine the douchebags from the Jackass show times about 200. That's about where they're at as a movement. They're a fart in a windstorm.
ReplyDelete