Projection from the hard left is nothing new. It's standard operating procedure for the left to project their own actions onto their political opponents to both demonize them and provide the justifications for their actions. Capitalism is derided in the world of OWS because the wealthiest 1% dictate and control the 99%. But they will embrace marxism, communism, and statism where the 1% that control the state / party / government dictate to the 99% of the population pretty much everything that the population can or should do.
Hot Air and Instapundit both noted one of the latest examples of hypocrisy from within the OWS movement where a small population (the 1% - but actually far smaller) are defining themselves as the leaders of this 'leaderless' movement and trying to seize control not only of the movement, but it's funds all while dictating to the rest of the OWS participants (the 99%) what to do, say, act, while part of the OWS movement. As Ed Morrissey noted, "Frankly, I think the 99% have a better chance in the system we have than in the neo-Stalinist model they're building in Zuccotti Park, and we have a century of experience on our side in that argument."
Highlighting some of the dysfunction that exists within the OWS ground zero of Zuccotti Park is this report by a New York Post reporter who spent a night in the anarchy that is OWS.
The parcel is now a sliver of madness, rife with sex attacks, robberies and vigilante justice.It’s a leaderless bazaar that’s been divided into state-like camps — with tents packed together so densely that the only way to add more would be to stack them.
And despite an NYPD watchtower overhead and the entire north side of Zuccotti lined with police vehicles, it is quickly becoming one of the most dangerous places in New York City.
We are witnessing the social experiement of what the real progressive / hard left statist model will look like if it gains the control that they demand. Richard Fernandez, author of the blog Belmont Club, writes a superb essay around the OWS movement, highlighting it's hypocrisy and disorder while asking the pertinent question for us to look at the one's who are running this movement from behind the scenes. He starts with the habit of falsehoods that come from the OWS movement.
When the Occupy protesters in London’s St Pauls assured the public that they did not intend to use the cathedral as a latrine they lied. “We could make a unanimous statement for this entire camp – that we are not here to defecate on or in St Pauls Cathedral.” The disavowal came after church workers had to clean human waste off carpet when someone — presumably not the Occupy protesters — used it as a latrine.
But the key lie was in the use of the word “unanimous”. It was a fib sitting like cherry atop of a stack of lies, but it was the Rosetta Stone for that entire edifice of falsehood.
Labor leader David Miliband said events playing out in London’s St Paul’s cathedral werewere a “danger signal” that “only the most reckless” would ignore, referring to the ‘capitalist greed’ which he argues provoked the protesters to occupy the cathedral and use it — with some of the Church of England’s hierarchy backing — to broadcast a denunciation of ‘corporate greed’ to all of Britain.
The danger signal that we should be heeding is not that of 'capitalist greed', but of the agenda and actions of the hard left - this collection of marxists, communists, fascists, anarchists, and useful idiots which are showing us their values and principles every day in their actions as part of the OWS movement. This essay is one of the 'read it all' recommendations that I have for those interested in the moral and ethical bankruptcy of the OWS movement.
Combining both the memes from Hot Air (and others) around the Orwellian actions of the OWS movement and the bankruptcy of those who are supporting the movement is Victor Davis Hanson in his latest essay, Occupy What? In VDH's unique style, he skewers not only the actions and motivations of the OWS movement, but also that of the Democrat political establishment which, in their hypocrisy, provides considerable support for those of the OWS movement.
Occupy Wall Street follows three years of sloppy presidential name-calling — “millionaires and billionaires,” slurs about Las Vegas and the Super Bowl, profit-mad, limb-lopping doctors, introspection that now is not the time for profits and at some point we should cease making money, spread the wealth, punish our enemies, and all the old Obama boilerplate. Someone finally got the message about the evil 1%.
When Ms. Pelosi and President Obama voice support for the protestors, we enter 1984. Does that mean that the Pelosis now pull their millions out of Wall Street, that the First Family eschews the 1% at Martha’s Vineyard and Vail? That Obama turns his back on Wall Street cash, and, for once, accepts public funding for his 2012 campaign?
Postmodern class warfare is an insidious business, and hinges on its advocates not looking in the mirror.
No wise politician should invest in the bunch like those rampaging in Oakland.
This essay, like virtually all by Victor Davis Hanson, is another must read and one that should challenge one to some deep thinking about the values and choices we are being presented leading to the 2012 election season.