The Hypocrisy Of Occupy Wall Street
I'm all for free speech -- even if I disagree with it. But, your right to free speech doesn't, for example, mean you get to stop other people from getting to work or make other taxpayers spend a lot of money to clean up from your speech. Or...as Wendy Kaminer writes on Spiked-Online:
Public protests have long been subject to reasonable time, place and manner restrictions (as I discussed here). But a Superior Court judge in Boston has effectively enjoined the city from imposing routine time, place and manner restrictions on Occupy Boston and evicting the 24/7 occupation from a small square in the financial district, pending a hearing on 1 December.What's so remarkable - and, in my view, so remarkably wrong - about this order? It suggests that an infinitesimal percentage of the population may appropriate a public park indefinitely, to the exclusion of more than 99 per cent of the people the appropriators claim to represent.
...What standard of review should courts employ in deciding if or when the rights of occupiers unduly infringe on the rights of others? Let's consider just a few questions raised by Occupy Boston's claim.
What if a group of Tea Partiers seeks to establish camp in the same space (Dewey Square) in order to demonstrate a contrary vision of community or communicate a contrary view of economic justice? ... So would Occupy Boston have the right to exclude the Tea Partiers, in order to prevent them from muddying its message, simply because they got there first? What if either Occupy Boston or the Tea Party or any other group decided to take over a much larger, more popular space, like the Boston Common, insisting that it was, after all, the only place in which their messages could effectively be conveyed?
What if a group of Christian nationalists set up camp in a public park and excluded all non-Christians from their encampment in order to demonstrate the possibility of a purified Christian America?
...Occupy Wall Street and its satellites are supposed to represent the interests of the unprivileged many; they should perhaps refrain from demanding occupational 'rights' that can only be extended to a privileged few.
As Kaminer writes at the Atlantic link above:
I suspect that many Occupy Wall Streeters base an excessively expansive view of their own First Amendment rights on a belief in the rightness of their movement...."I think it's disgusting that (the Mayor of Boston) said civil disobedience won't be tolerated,'' one 29 year old protester thoughtlessly exclaimed to the Boston Globe. Civil disobedience isn't meant to be tolerated; it's meant to expose official intolerance and injustice. Civil disobedience includes both a commitment to violating arguably unjust laws and a willingness to submit to lawful arrests.
Of course, if very plausible allegations of police brutality are true, then some arrests weren't lawful, and police officers responsible for them should be held to account. No one should have the right to break laws with impunity -- not bankers, not presidents, not police, and not protesters. Occupy Wall Streeters rightfully incensed by a regulatory regime that creates and protects gross economic inequality should be among the first to recognize this fundamental principle -- that everyone is equal under law.
And for those that don't know, Wendy Kaminer is a true free speech zealot, and has many times let her love and defense of free speech override her other affiliations (feminist, ACLU member)
Because of this, her essay carries a lot of weight (with me.)
jerry at December 4, 2011 2:21 AM
I happen to be staying right now at the Hyatt Regency San Fransisco which is about a block from the local Occupy encampment. A couple of days ago they decided to try to block the entrance of the hotel, telling people to boycott this evil corporate institution. I think this hotel probably employs over one thousand people, around 80 percent of whom appear to be immigrants. So in the name of social justice they would wreck the livelihood of thousands. Go figure.
DrMaturin at December 4, 2011 5:42 AM
The OWS is the mob in Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged. They are out to destroy all the institutions and corporations that make the system work. They have a cognitive dissonance that is amazing to watch.
They whine about the greedy capitalists on Wall Street. At the same time they are using cell phones that they paid almost nothing for by subscribing to network. They are using PCs and Macs that are cheap and work well because of Gates, Jobs, Dell and many others. They are wearing quality clothing made by greedy corporations. They are eating food from chain restaurants that is affordable because it is a chain.
I agree that changes are needed, but socialism and Marxism is not the answer.
Amy while I agree with you about the OT from Ben David -- this video shows much more of the UC Davis pepper spray incident:
Link to Accuracy in Media:
http://www.aim.org/aim-column/new-video-proof-of-media-lies-about-uc-davis-protests/
Jim P. at December 4, 2011 6:04 AM
Of course they're all about free speech. As long as it serves them.
In Seattle a group of occupiers beat up a guy for standing near their camp with a sign that said: "Occupy Somewhere Else, Not My School":
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2815791/posts
robin in tn at December 4, 2011 6:19 AM
These idiots, IDIOTS, cheapened the currency of street protest in an age of explosive government power, when we're likely to need this resource very badly in the years ahead.
And you're saying the cops made them uncomfortable.
Crid [CridComment at Gmail] at December 4, 2011 7:13 AM
The video Jim P. posted is game changing for a lot of people.
I was on Crid's side of the issue even before I saw it. This is way more warning than even I realized they got. I love how, near the end, the students start referring to themselves as "children."
Insufficient Poison at December 4, 2011 7:36 AM
'Tis the season.
Crid [CridComment at Gmail] at December 4, 2011 8:13 AM
I fantasize that everyone who participated in "casual pepper spray cop" memes, or who circulated John Pike's personal contact information, will see this video and be quietly embarrassed.
Please make sure you have your purses, bags, and other valuables before exiting the bandwagon...
Insufficient Poison at December 4, 2011 8:51 AM
You'd think that after how the whole Tahrir thing worked out for Egypt (hint: they're a theocracy now) the Occupy idiots would change their tune.
But useful idiots remain useful and idiotic to the bitter end.
brian at December 4, 2011 9:01 AM
Something that you realize when listening to these folks is that the likely reason that they believe that they're living in an oppressive 'hegemonic' fascist and generally uncool hell world is that they have an amazingly expansive view of what their rights and privileges should be.
paul at December 4, 2011 10:21 AM
How about we the taxpayers stop providing Port-O-Let services, garbage pickup, and police services to the encampments?
And where are they getting the electricity to charge those cell phones, iPads, and laptops? If it's taxpayer-supplied, let's stop that, too.
Conan the Grammarian at December 4, 2011 10:31 AM
slightly off topic. It sounds like the city of Richmond paid for things (e.g. trash pickup, toliets) for the Occupy group. Yet, the Tea Party had to pay for these things when they used the same area for a protest. When the Tea Party complained they received notice they were being auditted.
The Occupiers are getting special privileges.
The Former Banker at December 4, 2011 1:00 PM
Leave a comment