Oct 152011
The “Occupy Wall Street” fleabaggers have gotten the endorsement I’m sure they were looking for:
National Socialists supporting International Socialists. Hardly a surprise; the goals are pretty much the same, just with some of the labels swapped around.
BONUS ROUND:
[youtube IMjm4LxFa1c]
[youtube Q55OAozWeNo]
[youtube dnKetznvdUE]
10 Responses to “OWS Endorsement”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
The Nazis are endorsing Liberals? Wow! What next? Telling us that Communism is our salvation.
And an anti-semitic black woman? What next? Will we see African-Americans joining the American Nazi Party and wearing stormtrooper uniforms?
Corporations have two purposes: To make money and protect assets. So why protest corporate greed if they are doing what they are supposed to?
“The Nazis are endorsing Liberals? Wow! What next? Telling us that Communism is our salvation.”
You say that like it’s crazy, but many prominent fascists were communists first, and the Left of the 1930s was quite admiring of fascism before Hitler became too obviously evil to ignore.
Politics makes for some strange alliances. No, I didn’t forget history. Ironically, Hitler’s rise to power was made possible by the people he eventually went on to persecute (except those in high enough positions to have both him and his party off).
It would be interesting to see who the money is behind this “Occupy Wall Street” movement.
Anyone else see these protests and hope to hell that Jerry Pournelle’s fiction becomes reality?
I’m more afraid someone else’s will. But which Pournelle do you refer to, the CoDominium?
I vote for “Footfall.”
CoDominum, naturally.
You mean the mob riots during Spartan civil war? That’s some pretty interesting stuff he cooked up, based partly on stuff he dug up about the ancient Spartan Constitution; talk about checks and balances: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spartan_Constitution
Well, “Godwin’s Law”, there you have it. In more ways than one. If any person, movement or cause could be defined by any unsolicited endorsement or the presence of token troubled and confused people we’d all be in a heap of trouble regardless of more meaningful affiliations.
Some of the active “tea parties” remain largely unaffected by corporate money too and have a proven track record of not renting out large parts of their cortices (or integrity, or ideals) to FreedomWorks or Americans for Prosperity. Indeed there has been at least some interest expressed in coördinating activities with the “occupy” movement. The more passive majority of self-professed “tea partiers” certainly polls solidly in favor of reasonable progression of taxation and reasonable government functions – when specified and not presented in some ill-defined, purposefully framed abstract. So, endorsements come in many stripes indeed.
Irresponsible people have the luxury of making their reasonable statements stand out against all their “crazy” and their “crazy” stand out against everyone else’s reason. Though their presence and “crazy” must be noted, I’d appreciate if it were discussed proportional to the context of the much larger, dispassionate dialogue. Though I’m mystified and somewhat outraged by your out-of-hand framing of ideologies, there is clear empirical evidence of current risks the humanity has basically invented out of whole cloth. The corruption of the economy where multinationals have effectively become virtual principalities but still manage to pose as citizens of nations, for instance, is entirely untenable. So is a political and lobbying system evolving into a multibillion dollar industry. So is the all too evident stratification and stagnation of society.
So I posit there are many, many essential things we can improve greatly without never, ever veering even close to offending each others’ ideological sensibilities. Just plainly obvious stuff. So why not start there? Why not start there, when we clearly cannot afford the luxury of attending to all of the mutually annoying nitty gritty anymore? The World will not stop for us staring at our fun house mirror images. We can either be self-occupied, or self-occupied, if you catch my drift.
Love,
“An Occupant”
> If any person, movement or cause could be defined by any unsolicited endorsement or the presence of token troubled and confused people we’d all be in a heap of trouble regardless of more meaningful affiliations.
Welcome to the daily existence of anyone politically defineable as a conservative or a libertarian.
> So I posit there are many, many essential things we can improve greatly without never, ever veering even close to offending each others’ ideological sensibilities. Just plainly obvious stuff. So why not start there?
Feel free to come up with a list.
The big problem is that the OWS movement seems to be based on nonsense. The two biggest consistent issues I’ve seen are:
1) The economic downturn is Wall Streets fault
2) CEO’s are getting paid too much
Point #1 is a lie. Point #2 is nothing but jealousy. The inevitable result of lies and jealousy is socialism.