« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Occupy Wall Street latest skin mask for Blackshirt Left.

(Via Instapundit) I find it mildly astonishing that this even needed to be written, honestly:

What we are seeing here is the latest iteration of an old political program that has been given new strength by the failures of the global economy and the power of postmodern technology. [snip] … the concerns of labor intersect only tangentially with those of Occupy Wall Street’s theorists and prime movers. The occupiers have a lot more in common with the now-decades-old antiglobalization movement. They are linked much more closely to the “hacktivist” agents of chaos at WikiLeaks and Anonymous.

But perhaps this isn’t immediately obvious to the casual observer... so we’ll do a quick recap. The antiglobo movement has long been a haven for radical anarchists and would-be fascist stormtroopers who apparently feel that throwing various objects at authority figures is much more socially responsible than, say, bathing. Typically, this group is virulently parasitical; it delights in finding Activist Left causes (the Activist Right has higher standards when it comes to sanitation) and taking them over for its own purposes. Wesaw it with the antiwar movement – oh, my, did we see it with the antiwar movement – and now we’re seeing it with the Occupiers. Presumably the result will be the same: utter, complete, devastating, and humiliating failure for the Activist Left.

But it’s not all good news: as Matthew Continetti notes in the link above, the movement will be back in the spring, and will probably make an appearance at both party’s conventions. Expect their reappearance to be bloody; unlike the antiwar movement, the Occupiers’ core opinions are… nonexistent. That kind of vacuous lack of self-awareness virtually assures an ideological takeover by those who at least have an idea of what they want out of life…

Moe Lane  (crosspost)

PS: For the record, and contra Mr. Continetti, the time for confronting an ideology with ideas ends when that ideology decides to propagate itself via Molotov cocktail. At that point you’re perfectly justified in swinging back at the [expletive deleted] trying to, you know, kill you with fire over a point of policy planning.

I just wanted to make that clear before the Occupiers start throwing incendiary devices next year. Which, if they keep letting the blackshirts metastasize through their movement, will happen.

COMMENTS

  • jaykali

    Not sure it will get super violent. But I think there will be an OWS constituency, maybe the can finally rally around an idea or two that is actually feasible. Like Tea Party for instance are big on tax pledges and balance budget ideas that are actually feasible. So far OWS wants really radical stuff like wiping out all debt period which are just goofy pipe dream ideas. Will be interesting to see how the Democratic party deals with OWS.

  • mattyp

    You guys have to make a decision when it comes to the Occupy movement…

    Are they fascists (blackshirts), socialists, or anarchists?

    You could make an argument for socialism having some overlap with anarchism,, but, for the most part, those three groups do not overlap.

    Which is it? You can’t have all three.

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    –no–text–

  • johnt

    groupings of violent trash next year. Putting aside the fastidious call for strictly definined catagories, note above, the relationship and shared power driven, destructive motives will be a unifying force. Same goals, same tactics, same threat. Obama is their guy, Statism their lust.

  • wennejunk

    Excellent.

  • http://www4.webng.com/rickbull/lostlucky/ rickbull

    Because I am smelling a very strong scent of leftist musk coming from your direction.

    Perhaps you missed the DKOS exit–it’s about a million miles back and diverges from the other side of the highway.

  • pcscipio

    with your post. The anti-war movement of the Vietnam era did have some very dramatic impacts: 1) it precipitated the end of the draft (which I don’t think was a particularly good thing); and 2) it began the change in America’s faith and trust in its government.