The people, united, are looking quite decrepit
The limits of agitprop
The people, united, are looking quite decrepit
You know that a movement is getting desperate when they have to disrupt traffic to get attention. Over the past few days, the Occupy Philly protestors realized that the best way to remain relevant was to block streets, force SEPTA to close down (temporarily) train stations and make it difficult for commuters to get home. It was their own form of civil disobedience, otherwise known as a temper tantrum. They were being moved from Dilworth Plaza, didn’t like it, and decided to make their displeasure known to the 99% of Philadelphians who just wanted to get home after a long day’s work.
Ironic, since the Occupiers are all about getting jobs, right?
I know that some people believe the “Movement” is relevant, valid and has a clear message. I don’t happen to be one of them, because I think that camping out in tents with homemade signs and creating even more of a health hazard than already exists in our municipal plaza is a pathetic form of agitprop.
I also think that voting is a hell of a lot more effective in creating change than standing around with the ‘collective’ (someone’s been reading a little too much Dostoevsky) and complaining about the rich bankers and why they’re not wearing handcuffs.
That’s why I loved this piece by Will Wilkinson, which paints about the clearest picture of the problems with Occupy’s methods (as opposed to its so-called message) that I’ve read thus far. Here’s an instructive tidbit:
As I pointed out in my Economist post, public attitudes toward the Occupy movement have gone south. I think the evidence supports the proposition that keeping up the camping is counterproductive, unhealthy if you will, for the Occupy movement. And I don't think it's hard to understand why the Occupiers have so swiftly lost anything resembling a populist mandate. Like I've said, the movement is audaciously presumptuous, claiming to represent "the people", even when most people don't want anything to do with it. In many cities (but by no means everywhere), the Occupiers are violating local laws and ordinances put in place by "the people" through ordinary democratic means. They are not only asserting de facto property rights over public spaces, but are creating significant public expense at a time when municipalities are stretched thin. It's not surprising that many citizens resent this, and it's hard to see the strategic upside of aggravating people further.
That’s a good point. Some people think that a movement gains nobility in direct proportion to how much it annoys and inconveniences the public. If they don’t make the rest of us sweat, or suffer, they’re not doing their jobs.
Well I guess by that measure, Occupy has been a major success.
Comments (42)
What a mind-boggling piece of circular logic. So then, by this Einsteinian work of thought, the only noble movement would be one that doesn't further inconvenience an already-inconvenienced populace. Wow. Guess that amerikan revolution, French revolution, so-called "Arab spring" all had it wrong - how dare they further increase the dullards sitting by getting f-ed?— CiceroSpuriousDeodatus- The french revolution and the American Revolution have little in common. The occu-tards are more of the french type and YES they got it WRONG. — glennsfb
- The truth is that the "public's attitude" toward these miscreants was always negative. People who said they were sympathetic, also admitted they didn't know what "Occupants" message was. Once they discovered the message included free tuition, free healthcare, wealth redistribution and Jew hatred virtually no responsible citizen supported this marxist mob. It took the media weeks to discover the average working person loathed the tent dwellers. Philly.com's coverage was a slobbering love affair of liberal blabber.
The issue that should be explored is this: Who granted these filthy freaks a permit to camp out in Dilworth Plaza indefinitly? I submit the entire episode was illegal and overtly political. Nutter should not be praised for the way he handled this. Our City government has just cost us several million in lost business and police overtime. The "Occupation" was an ugly joke played at the taxpayers expense, and for no good purpose. There should be a thorough investigation.— retour - "Who granted these filthy freaks a permit to camp out in Dilworth Plaza indefinitly?"
That would be the Bill of Rights, the First Amendment. But I guess Nutter doesn't want any homeless citizens of poor Black and Brown kids in Center City, University City, South Street or Society Hill. Segregation!
I guess in Mayor Nutters mind, free speech and freedom have a curfew.
— SonOfUncleSam - Actually "Son Of" most of the people at the 'collective' looked fairly pale to me...it was definitely a white, college student movement as opposed to something that represented a cross section of society. So please, don't play that tired race card, especially where it doesn't fit. — Christine
- I find your reference to the "Arab Spring" interesting, "Cicero" (might want to try another screen name, that fellow was an analytical champion...) the front page of the NY Times today has a disturbing article about how Egypt has now fallen into the hands of Islamists, and that the most conservative of the Islamists garnered about 20 to 30 percent of the vote. So we are now looking at a country where the participation of women will be highly restricted, and Christians and Jews will need to be particularly careful. Any other great movements you'd like to talk to us about?— Christine
- So Christine now opposes democracy? Not surprising coming from the same person who apoligzes for pedophiles. btw: next time you have your picture taken for your blog, select one that doesn't make you look cross-eyed!— chasing history
- Chasing history, how any chasers have you had today? Might wanna lay off the happy juice. And the pedophile stuff is old. Ask Voice of the Faithful for some new material, hon.— Christine
- Hi, Chris. Putting aside homework for a while....Being a libra, I guess I see both sides of the coin. The notion of an "occupation" was probably not the most sensible way to approach the subject of the miscreants on Wall Street. A simple march and some speeches would have done it. I think the idea was to garner publicity for a grassroots issue, that of inequality, and maybe a few others. Who knows? It was like a minestrone.
But of course it attracted the riff raff and then it disintegrated.
But I think was need to commend the mayor and police commissioner again for how they handled things. The best in the nation.
— Magistra - Who granted a two month permit to this group and allowed them to create an illegal tent city in Dilworth Plaza? Why are the City's media "watchdogs" not holding Nutter responsible for this nightmare? This is the same mayor who reports that we are out of money for the Mummer's Parade and other business creating events. We suffer from a feckless one party City government.— retour
Comment removed.- Retour, maybe Nutter could have stopped it before it began, but then hindsight is always 20-20. The whole thing could have exploded into street violence without those two months of negotiations. We'll never know.
— Magistra - Comment removed.
- So that this doesn't go off the deep end, my point is that a 2 month permit to actually OCCUPY Dilworth Plaza should never have been issued. I am not saying the demonstration for a couple days should not be permitted. So, there never should have been a literal occupation, and then there would not have been any need for clubs or pepper spray. Where the occupants go from here? wouldn't they prefer China, Cuba, Venezuela, places that equitably distribute misery.— retour
- Comment removed.
- Take a picture of them and you will see that they are filthy freaks.
Better yet, take a stroll through the underground subway concourses and you will smell their legacy in their version of outhouses.— PlumberJoe - I think that the problem with Occupy has been that they are more about the theater, the agitprop, than the message. The Freedom Riders sat respectfully, but defiantly, at those cafeteria counters. The Farm Workers followed Cesar Chavez in a dignified manner, the people praying the rosary silently at abortion clinics (not the Operation Rescue types) let their faith speak for them. And the Tea Partiers, give or take an annoying flag-draped crazy, were also more about the message than the method (and they all got permits that expired within a few days, or hours...) The problem with Occupy, again, is the problem with ActUp and the guys at the 1968 Democratic Convention, who were/are willing to get attention at the expense of communicating the message. As Hamblin wrote, you do not make friends...or at least, communicate...with people when you block their commute home. And if you don't care, well then, don't expect to be respected. Retour, I also agree that we need to investigate who gave the 'open ended' permit to the protestors-that doesn't sound like 'business as usual' to me.— Christine
-
"...maybe Nutter could have stopped it before it began." Magistra, the City could have definitly stopped it before it began by simply not issuing the permit. They could have issued a permit that allowed for a public demonstration, in any one of a number of places, for some period of time, but no tent dwelling. People cannot just go live in public spaces and create health hazards. Tell me of any other demonstartion that you can think of where the demonstrators took up residence for 2 months, or even two weeks?
RHO; Not all were filthy freaks. However, most were filthy and many were freaks. Thanks for the correction.— retour - Don't give the homeless low income housing or Section 8, just beat them up and force them away from the tourists and beautiful rich people so we don't have to be reminded about the other side of the society that is working for us. How dare they be the stink at our five course meals!
Thank you PPD for evicting the homeless from their home. I am glad they are shutting down the largest shelter at Ridge, when it is snowing in October. Hopefully Ebeneezer Nutter will be happy when they freeze to death, literally. Merry Christmas, I'm sure Jesus would be proud!— SonOfUncleSam - Lovely, peaceful discussion. But answer for me one vital question. Who was the leader for these "clowns.?" What was there stated purpose? Their objectives? When you do not have goals to measure by, how do you know you have achieved something? They have achieved nothing. Other than to agitate.— PlumberJoe
- A bunch of 3rd grade kids would have been more eloquent, had more influence, destroyed less property and achieved more lasting results.— PlumberJoe
- I agree with most statements here. The Occupiers may have had noble ideals but were sabotaged by the drifters who were attracted by the food and shelter.
I do see your point, retour, about the issuing of permits. Nutter could have handled it in any number of ways. He chose to let them have permits to camp for a short while.
At least no one was sent to the hospital. Chris, thanks for teaching me a new word: agitprop.
Yes, street theater....but missing the puppets I think.— Magistra - Noble ideas? What ideas- me, good; capitalism, bad.— PlumberJoe
- You are all missing the point (although the "Occupy" part of the protest did seem to me to me--while impressive in its tenacity--sort of pointless; the protesting makes perfect sense). The message is out there. The young and the jobless have spoken. Were you listening or simply calling them names for daring to take a stand. Would you be brave enough to do the same? Doubtful. Public support IS largely behind Occupy. It will be interesting to compare Occupy with TEA, given that the latter was financed by the robber barons themselves. Occupy is movement of thought, nonviolence (yes, it's true), and being willing to "take one for the team." It's quite selfless and impressive in its global scope. It's just the beginning. People are not going to take this hyper-capitalist raping anymore.— sophistry
- PJ - the "noble ideas" are that there are some criminals in the banking system who not only got away scot free with their crimes such as lending sub-prime mortgages to people who could not pay them, but took the bailout when their schemes imploded as they knew they would. That is not capitalism in its truest form but a scam.— Magistra
- sophy, my almost pen pal, you must stop your lies. You are no more a professor, tenured or not, then you are the man in the moon. You are unable to put together a cohesive paragraph, let alone teach.
Go dwell in your petition and dream your impossible dreams.— PlumberJoe - PJ, be nice. Be the bigger person. You're already the bigger intellect because you would never use the phrase 'hyper-capitalist' to describe 'rape.' And if you attack and taunt, it just makes him or her growl louder. Be sweet. — Christine
- Magistra, if you really knew anything about the subprime crime you would have other things to say. Remember the old PSFS saying, wishing won't do it, the facts will. If you were teaching me in class, I would explain the facts to the class and have you sitting in the corner wearing the dunce hat.— PlumberJoe
- Comment removed.
- There is simply no comparing Occupy with the TP, which indisputably caused the largest political landslide in modern history in the 2010 Congressional elections. The only likely impact of the anarcho-marxist occupy protests will be to accelerate the movement of the electorate to the right. That is exactly what happened in 1968.* History has shown that Americans are repulsed by political radicals. That's the end of this debate for me until we see what happens in 2012.
"On November 5, 1968, the Republican nominee, former Vice President Richard Nixon won the election over the Democratic nominee, Vice President Hubert Humphrey. Nixon ran on a campaign that promised to restore law and order to the nation's cities, torn by riots and crime. The election of 1968 was a realigning election that permanently disrupted the New Deal Coalition that had dominated presidential politics for 36 years."
*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1968— retour - Comment removed.
- Hablin, the glaring and consistent flaw in your logic is that you see one point and then draw a straight line. You operate from no facts, made up facts or erroneous conclusion from real facts.
You depend on others to echo praise. You cannot stand on your own, independent words.— PlumberJoe - Well done retour. When Will Bunch and Matt Taibi and others write and publish books about Occupy, or when their political counterparts try and do a hatchet job on Occupy, we'll know that the Tea Party had its equal in political heft. Until then, until there really is something other than "they focused our attention on income disparity" there is no escaping the fact that the Tea Party created more of a sea change than Occupy has, or arguably, will. — Christine
- Hamblin, what is the message of the Occupiers? Not what the press or you think, but the official message of the Occupiers. There is none.
Polling shows Obama is unfavored for reelection by 63% Do you accept that poling?
As for financing, the Occupiers are financed by unions, by Seros and by other radical organizations.
The Tea Party does not burn or destroy or interrupt business operations. Nor does the Tea Party defecate in public places. The Tea Party message is one of reforming government. The Occupier message, by their actions, is one of anarchy.
Get your facts, straight, at least once.
It is a pleasant change to see post without name calling and derisive rant. Keep it up. You may yet graduate from the Little Red School House.
— PlumberJoe - For your reading pleasure, Plumber (and those who need the education):
Let the professor (I'm up for dept chair, actually) explain to you where and how Flower's ranty column goes wrong.
1. Flowers uses inflammatory diction ("temper tantrum," desperate, difficult, incovenient, ironic) to appease the choir of acolytes who share her extremism and disdain for issues of social and economic justice.
2. By using these choice words, Flowers does not persuade anyone who might be undecided; she speaks to her core audience of crazies while actually inciting anger on the other side--all while completely ignoring the purpose of her bully pulpit: to convince others that she's right. She fails utterly in this regard.
3. The belittling, sarcastic tone apparent in Flowers' writing is off-putting and wholly ineffective.
4. Flowers almost completely ignores the power of refutation (barely mentioning the purpose of Occupy, which, clearly, she barely understands, or did not even try to research). By pretending that refutation is unimportant--one must understand the opposing viewpoint, after all, which Flowers seems incapable of doing--Flowers undermines her own, largely pointless and very weak, argument.
5. This column is intellectually lazy, unconvincing, poorly researched and merely inflammatory,
I'd give it an F. Actually, no I would not. I would hand it back and say "try again. Do some reading and critical thinking and let's see what you can come up with."
This is NGE (not good enough--a grade I often give).
1.— sophistry - Okay, I really have to respond here. Sad woman (man) can you not hear people chuckling at your constant attempts at self-aggrandizement? Hamlin, for whom I have respect, answers directly, does not tout his imaginary credentials, and challenges me on specific points. Retour cites creditable sources, Magistra is eloquent and in many ways persuasive in the manner you seem to 'prefer' and Plumber Joe (who I asked to be nice to you earlier, in line with my support for the Americans with Disabilities Act) has a grasp of history. You provide comic relief, you are an interesting aberration of the normal anonymous dilettante, you have no intellectual heft beyond that which you give to yourself...keep writing, but please, don't be surprised that the only sound you will hear will be the voices in your own echo chamber (and the chuckles.) — Christine
- Please sign the petition to cancel this horrible column and all media attention that Flowers (who does not make the effort to deserve it) gets: www.change.org/petitions/philadelphia-daily-news-cancel-christine-flowers-column-and-blog-postings
If you are tired of the anger, tired of the inflammation of already intolerable partisan bickering, tired of the lack of intelligence or justice, please sign now. You can even do so anonymously. Thank you.— sophistry - Finally, Plumber, repeating the same mistruths will not magically make them true (something you continuously do, especially when it comes to Occupy. The camping might have been inconvenient, but otherwise, the movement does have purpose and a message. Just because you have not bothered to understand that message does not mean there isn't one). So keep calling Hamblin insane or wrong or whatever epithets you seem to prefer (he's clearly intelligent). Doubt whether I am what I say I am. Keep hating on all teachers. I for one could not care less. You should be aware that continued shouting about things that make you nervous will not make them go away. You have to work to understand the world, not just yell at it and call it (dead wrong) names.— sophistry
- sophy, the only chair in your future is a high chair.— PlumberJoe
- Waaahh....Plumber, you made me cry...another right winger calling a more liberal (centrist, actually) professor a BABY. Say it isn't so....I'm SO INSULTED. WAAAHHH, Mommmy!!!— sophistry
- Christine, I like to post at the end of the post train, where it is easier to find the latest. My comment here belongs after your kindhearted explanation to sophistry delineating her egregious path and posts.
I truly offered Pro Bono expertise to her to help her (a) to produce winning arguments and (b) to seem like a rational, sane human. I explained that it was not because I believed in what I would argue, but simply to help her in her desperation. But, alas, she rejected the kind offer and did her usual ignorant thing. Pity the poor wretched soul. If ignorance is bliss, she will surely attain heaven on earth.
I must also note, that however you may respect Hamblin, I cannot, for any number of reasons. He cannot produce a logical argument. He sucks up to sophistry. And he has no clue as to which end is up. My dear pal, retour, said it best, when he suggested to Hamblin that he get off his high horse and come down to earth.
To me. sophistry and Hamblin are cut from the same mold, they just stumble through different rhetoric. Now, how is that for polite repartee?— PlumberJoe - Sign the petition to CANCEL this hideous, insipid and repetitious train wreck of a non-intellectual, fear-mongering "column." www.change.org/petitions/philadelphia-daily-news-cancel-christine-flowers-column-and-blog-postings
These are hate-filled screeds penned by a slow yet pretentious virago. Philadelphia deserves better!— sophistry
1
Popular Posts
About this blog
See Christine Flowers on Channel 6's "Inside Story" Sunday at 11:30 a.m.
Christine M. Flowers
Daily News Columnist
Email Christine M. at cflowers1961@yahoo.com Reach Christine M. at cflowers1961@yahoo.com.
Classifieds:
Site Services:
Partners: