Racist Rager @ Occupy Wall St.
The Occupy Wall Street movement has adopted racist rules for speech at its nightly “General Assembly” meetings, according to which white men cannot speak unless preceded by some other type of person.
State your race, gender & sexual orientation, then maybe we'll let you speak. Later.
Occupy Wall Street’s General Assembly operates under a revolutionary “progressive stack.” A normal “stack” means those who wish to speak get in line. A progressive stack encourages women and traditionally marginalized groups speak before men, especially white men. This is something that has been in place since the beginning, it is necessary, and it is important.Is it OK to be a liberal racist as long as it's against the Jews and whites? It's all about the color of our skin to these liberals. When will they give up their hate? They hate the rich and want what they have. They want the "rich" to work and pay for their education, houses... and they think protesting is the best way to take what they want. There have been numerous signs that say, "kill the rich". They don't care about anyones rights. At what point will you and I be the target of these liberal thieves and racists?
“Step up, step back” was a common phrase of the first week, encouraging white men to acknowledge the privilege they have lived in their entire lives and to step back from continually speaking. This progressive stack has been inspiring and mind-boggling in its effectiveness.
[Hat tip: Matt Sledge at Huffington Post]
Aaaagghh! I can hardly stand to watch this! They won't even let the other people talk, but yet they say they want people to think. I guess that only goes for those who don't agree with them. They don't have to think. Yes, they are blatantly racist. If they talked that way about black people or muslims, it would be all over the news.
ReplyDeleteRemember back when the Dems tried desperately to portray the Tea Party as a bunch of Ku Klux Klan robe wearing, nigga hating racists? Problem was there was no video or audio evidence to support that contention. However, the Tea Party was largely white. Right? Unlike the rainbow diversity and genteel nature of those occupying Wall Street. Right?
ReplyDeleteWhoops. Those goddamned Jews. You know them. They control the money. Did I mention “money grubbing” Jews?
Wonder if the so-called Main Stream Media will air this bit of hate speech? Now, for those of you who are “irony” challenged and don’t understand sarcasm, I do not REPEAT not believe that Jews control Wall Street, money or banks. The power and influence exercised in financial markets both in New York and around the world are devoid of ethnic or racial dominance.
But here we have visual proof that at least some of those gathered to “Occupy” Wall Street believe that the “Jews” are the money puppet masters. There is a strong anti-semitic element. Want more evidence?
They are white, they are young and they are idiots. Care to proffer evidence that these are smart, rational folk?
The media double-standard infuriates me. The role of the media is to inform the general public. Used improperly the media can be used as a propaganda club in the cause of evil. Well, that’s exactly what’s going on now in this contrived Wall Street protest.
I am not arguing that the folks who work on Wall Street have always conducted themselves in an honest, ethical manner. But using the excesses of a few to justify the dismantling of capitalism is absolutely insane.
What is it all about?
ReplyDeleteIt is not just about America, Wall Street, corporate greed, crony capitalism...Its about these and a whole lot more. Its about the whole of humanity. As humanity progresses further into the 21st century, it has yet to find the answers to some basic problems affecting its survival. How should all human beings live together in our habitat of earth? How should we organise ourselves to share its resources and maintain its habitable state? The answers to these questions become more desperate in the face of a perpetually growing world's population.
Until now, we have been living in conflicts, fighting to grab as much as possible for ourselves. To fight more effectively, we organise ourselves first as clans, then tribes, fiefdoms, kingdoms and now, nations. While we organise and fight throughout our history, we have seen humanity thrown into periods of war and peace, territorial expansions and contractions and the rises and ebbs of power and influence. The current state is a world of independent nations. In it, we continue to compete and fight for the earth’s resources. It may not be a zero-sum game, but it is a finite-sum game. As one nation gets more, it leaves less for the others. So we have nations wishing the worst for the others. This cannot go on forever. It endangers the existence of the whole humanity. More and more nations are having more and more destructive weapons. There are now enough weapons of mass destruction to destroy the whole world many times over.
Capitalistic economy ultimately depends on consumption for growth. It has to encourage mass consumption. The more the masses consume, the more the economy grows. The faster they consume, the faster the economy grows. The masses are incessantly encouraged, even conned into consuming, even if it is beyond, or way beyond, their means. Only a small percentage makes the most gain out of this frenzy of intoxicated consumption. The system ends up with a small percentage of very rich living above and beyond masses of poor, disadvantaged and deprived. This small percentage do not and cannot feel for the injustices felt by the masses. When the government too is controlled by this small percentage and is not able to help the masses, then the time is ripe for a social revolution. The whole system has to be overthrown. Unlike social revolutions in the past which started from a locality and spread slowly, in the open and well-interconnected world of today, a social revolution can start nationwide, and even worldwide, instantaneously, in a parallel, distributed model. This is what the “Occupy Wall Street” movement is about. Will it result in a new and better world model? Let’s hope it does because humanity is craving for one.
These protests could be ended PEACEFULLY if EVERY BUSINESS IN THE ENTIRE AREA went to password protected WiFi
ReplyDeleteThese 'protesters' are pampered, wimpy losers with no idea at all why they are there!
Chris, did you see this racist "Occupy Atlanta" group of idiots that refused to let Civil Rights Icon and Congressman John Lewis speak? Here is the YouTube video. http://youtu.be/3QZlp3eGMNI I laughed so f-ing hard I think I dislocated a rib. What a bunch of maroons!
ReplyDeleteIt's funny how they call the Tea Party racist, but these protests could practically be the Aryan Nation of protesters.
Manhattan Wednesday, Oct. 5, 2011, in New York. Unions gave a high-profile boost to the long-running protest against Wall Street and economic inequality, with their members joining thousands of protesters in a lower Manhattan march.
ReplyDeletePresident Obama’s shock troops are marching in the streets. Occupy Wall Street - a movement composed of communists, anarchists, socialists and anti-globalization student radicals - is spreading. Protests have swelled in cities including New York, Washington, Los Angeles, Chicago, Denver and Philadelphia. The protesters are gaining influence and numbers. A ragtag group of hippie students has turned into a potent political force.
Occupy Wall Street seeks to demonize big banks, large corporations and capitalism. Its goal is to overturn America’s economic structure. The protesters are calling for wealth redistribution, fees on bank profits and massive tax increases on the rich.
Many are demanding a socialist revolution - the confiscation of private property and nationalization of the economy. They are the heirs of Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels and Vladimir Lenin. Their aim is to impose the hammer and sickle upon America.
Leftist radicals, such as Michael Moore and Noam Chomsky, have endorsed the anti-capitalist movement. Both men have glorified authoritarian communist regimes - Fidel Castro’s Cuba, Hugo Chavez’sVenezuela and the old Soviet Union. Their hatred for America has found expression in the rabble on the streets of New York and Washington.
Actress Roseanne Barr even has called for the return of the “guillotine.” She wants bankers to be sent to “re-education camps,” and if they still refuse to hand over their profits, they should be beheaded, she says. This is the language of revolutionary terror and Marxist violence.
Mr. Obama has said he “sympathizes” with the protesters - especially their anger at Wall Street and “fat-cat” bankers. For years, he has demonized billionaires and millionaires, jet owners and corporate America. His divisive, irresponsible rhetoric has laid the groundwork for Occupy Wall Street.
The White House connection is even deeper. The protest’s main players all have ties to the Obama administration. Its primary organizer is former Obama “green-jobs czar” Van Jones. Mr. Jones is a self-avowed communist and follower of Saul Alinsky, the radical community organizer who also was Mr. Obama’s intellectual mentor.
Mr. Jones said October is the month of the long-awaited “progressive offensive” - the watershed moment when students, labor unions, socialists and civil rights activists coalesce into an anti-Tea Party to blunt Middle America’s growing opposition to Mr. Obama.
Occupy Wall Street also is being supported by MoveOn.org. The group was one of the first to back Mr. Obama’s presidential candidacy when he was still an obscure senator from Illinois. The protests are being funded by socialist billionaire George Soros - a key Obama ally. And the protesters are being joined by big labor, the administration’s most powerful constituency.
Hence, Occupy Wall Street is not a spontaneous uprising of disenchanted citizens frustrated with corporate plutocracy and capitalist excess. Rather, it is a planned, manufactured attempt to prop up Mr. Obama’s failed presidency. It is a page taken straight from the Alinsky playbook: Demonize bankers and businessmen in order to divert attention from the real source of our economic woes, Mr. Obama’s policies.
ReplyDelete· The president inherited a recession, and he has deepened it.
· His out-of-control spending and trillion-dollar deficits have brought us to the brink of bankruptcy.
· America’s debt credit rating has been downgraded.
· Growth has slowed to less than 1 percent.
· Unemployment has risen above 9 percent.
· Inflation is rising as consumer confidence declines.
· Obamacare is strangling job creation and business investment.
· Mr. Obama has waged war upon the private sector.
· If those students are truly angry about joblessness and a bleak future, they should direct their fury at the president.
Instead, they mouth leftist pieties. They are a spoiled, dependent and illiterate generation that believes it is entitled to government handouts, state coddling and permanent prosperity. They don’t wish to be self-reliant and make their own way; rather, they want others - successful, productive members of society - to transfer their hard-earned money to subsidize their indolence. They are the kind of deadbeats the welfare state eventually produces - lazy, whining and shameless.
Alinsky argued that an economic crisis inevitably fosters a political crisis. The key for the hard left was to take advantage of our misery to seize power and impose a socialist regime. By sowing street mayhem, Occupy Wall Street is hoping to demoralize and distract Middle America into believing big business is the evil culprit for the financial collapse. The very opposite, however, is true. Meddlesome government intervention caused the housing bubble, the subprime mortgage debacle and the reckless bank lending practices that triggered the Great Recession. The way out is not more statism; it is less. Only a vibrant free market can restore economic recovery and stimulate job growth.
The protesters are not interested in real solutions. They are political activists masquerading as concerned citizens. Progressives are desperate to keep Mr. Obama in office. This is why the president is deliberately encouraging Occupy Wall Street. He hopes to create enough bedlam and then target Republicans, the Tea Party and the rich.
He is pursuing the Alinsky strategy of divide and conquer, pitting interest groups and different classes against each other.
Mr. Obama has unleashed class hatred and racial hostility in the pursuit of state socialism.
It is clear that his 2008 campaign slogan of “hope and change” was really a thinly veiled rallying cry, not to save the nation, but to precipitate the downfall of American capitalism.
awwwww, poor rich white people. They can't speak. And the fact that the Aryan Nation shows up at TEA Party events makes me giggle.
ReplyDeleteWhen has the Aryan Nation ever been welcome at a Tea Party? It never happened. I do remember the video of a racist being told to leave the Tea Party. No one is saying jack to the racist in the Occupy protests. In fact racism is part of the leadership. Why is it that white people are not welcome to speak unless someone of color speaks first and then "let's the white person speak"? It seems the liberals all "giggle" at racism.
ReplyDeleteFlawed short-term memory appears rampant in the nation’s capital. Conservatives were accused of hyperbolizing President Obama’s economic policies when they labeled his “millionaire’s tax“ approach as ”class warfare.” Now only weeks later the anti-capitalistic “Occupy Wall Street” movement has spread across the country pitting Americans against each other calling for massive redistribution of wealth, while being encouraged by foreign revolutionaries. Some members of Congress are concerned by the growing mob and it’s intentions, but former Speaker of the House and current Minority Leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi calls it democracy.
ReplyDeleteBeyond her alarming defense of the chaotic civil unrest that has already cost local governments millions, Rep. Pelosi went unchallenged in her comparison of the Occupy Wall Street movement to the Tea Party, in addition to her habitually challenged accusations that members of Congress were spit on during Tea Party rallies in years past.
“I didn’t hear him say anything when the Tea Party was out demonstrating, actually spitting on members of Congress right here in the Capitol,”Rep. Pelosi said in an interview with Christiane Amanpour on ABC’s “This Week.” “And he and his colleagues were putting signs in the windows encouraging them. But let’s not get down to that.”
The incident that Rep. Pelosi was alluding to took place in March 2010, when Rep. Emanuel Cleaver accused one rouge Tea Party demonstrator of spitting on him. Video of the accused incident went viral with no clear evidence of the actual spitting, other than Rep. Cleaver’s reaction to a protester appearing to yell “kill the bill” in his face, adjacent to a Capital Hill police officer who shows little reaction to the accused ejected saliva. One Tea Party group offered a $15,000 reward for proof of the spitting.
Ironically, Rep. Cleaver was only a few strides behind Rep. John Lewis during the March 2010 incident. On Friday, Occupy Atlanta refused to allow Rep. Lewis to speek at their event, which he came down to downton Atlanta to support.
In her ABC interview, Pelosi went on to defend the protestors’ as representatives of American anger towards Wall Street and continued unemployment, along with the failure of TARP, commonly known as the bank bailout.
“How they characterize someone who may disagree with them, that says more about them,” said Rep. Pelosi in regards to Republican Majority Leader Rep. Eric Cantor’s comments in regards to Occupy Wall Street.
Interesting.
In April 2009, Rep. Pelosi characterized the Tea Party tax day protests and those she disagreed with as opponents to “the great middle class,” and not a grassroots movement but ”Astroturf,” manufactured and funded by high-earners.
Race-based decisions are not the same thing as racism. Racism is a massive system that distributes resources unequally to the powerful/majority, to the detriment of the few, based on race. OWS is not a massive system, but an attempt to re-balance or address that system. Interpersonal racism (e.g., slinging a slur) certainly exists, but it's not the only form. Institutional racism is less personal, and less obvious. So, the historic practice of redlining by banks is an example. Not clearly 'racism' in the more conventional sense but still the unequal distribution of resources by the powerful.
ReplyDeleteThat isn't what you guys said about the Tea Party. Why the hypocracy now?
ReplyDelete