David Thompson


Blog powered by Typepad

« Friday Ephemera | Main | Hush, Our Betters Are Speaking »

November 20, 2011



sense of royal privilege over other people’s property

"Hazmat Crew Called in to Remove 200lbs of Human Faeces Near Occupy Santa Cruz."

They're winning me over a little bit more every day.


Plus, that round-the-clock drumming… it's not for everyone:

"Police have charged two Occupy Maine activists with assault and arrested a third on a disorderly conduct charge in two separate disturbances at an encampment at a Portland park. Police say 45-year-old Alan Porter was hit in the head with a hammer Friday morning after he started drumming to awaken the other occupants. One 34-year-old man was charged with aggravated assault, and another 34-year-old man was given a summons for assault for allegedly choking Porter."


Why do you think the US and UK occupations have attracted differing amounts of realist coverage? I'm talking about the kind of videos and article, David highlights. On both sides of the Atlantic the establishment is extraordinarily sympathetic to the occupiers and the exposure has come from other quarters. Is it the lack of people in the UK willing to get involve for long enough to catch the crazy? Or is it that the actual quality of the occupations is different? Are British Trotskyists better disciplined?


Arrogance, vindictiveness and utter self-involvement.


They just can't help themselves, can they? Now it's 24-hour noise pollution for a whole neighbourhood.

Way to win the public over, you stupid self-absorbed parasites.


“Now it’s 24-hour noise pollution for a whole neighbourhood.”

But of course. After all, these are the same warriors for “social justice” who hoped to “shut down the subways” and “shut it all down” (“it” being large parts of Manhattan). In all of the examples we’ve seen, in over a dozen “occupations,” when has there been any concern for the people on whom this pantomime is being imposed and who have to foot the bill for clearing up afterwards? Where’s the “social justice” for those who have to put up with the noise, the intimidation, the obstruction, the filth - the whole infantile drama - night after night?

Imposing on random strangers is a badge of credibility - and a reward. Feeling powerful by sheer force of numbers is what their nasty little egos like, though I suspect few of them would be willing to admit it publicly. Just like the “peaceful” mob that deliberately trapped a disabled woman inside a lobby, even taunting her; and the “peaceful” mob that trapped alarmed families in their cars while screaming and banging on the windscreen; and the “peaceful” mob that jostled old ladies down concrete steps. The list goes on. The whole point is to aggravate and intimidate, to make it clear that should you try to stop them or take away their toys, things could get physical. And of course it will be all your fault.

That’s what mobs are for.

Goodbye Lenin

"should you try to stop them or take away their toys, things could get physical."

I am sure there was a Monty Python sketch where some mafia-type gangsters told an British army officer that it would be a shame if one of his tanks got broken if he didn't do what they said.


The attitude of the human animals on wall street could not be made for Orwellian if it were designed for the screen. The equality issue has a long way to go; some of the OWS leaders decide that "camping" is for the peons:



If these losers really wanted to 'change politics' they wouldn't keep on doing things that really piss people off.


“If these losers really wanted to ‘change politics’ they wouldn’t keep on doing things that really piss people off.”

Disgusting and alienating the electorate isn’t the best way to win political leverage, or to make other people want to hand over even more of their earnings. And it takes an obstinate kind of stupidity not to grasp that point. But, as Sam noted, malignant narcissists can’t help themselves. It’s what they do. And so we see episodes like those mentioned here over the last few weeks, in which the “occupiers” imagine they’re showing the world just how serious they are, while demonstrating precisely the opposite.


Nancy Pelosi was very concerned about the potential for violence. In fact she's downright choked up about it. On the edge of tears..


And that's just how she felt about the Tea Party people. Can you imagine the emotional state she must be in today? I know I'm concerned. Has anyone checked on her lately?


This past Thursday, Occupy Seattle with help from the SEIU, shut down the University Bridge in the middle of the 5pm rush hour.

Winning hearts and minds by inconveniences working class folks. Brilliant.

Link - http://www.aaronmbrown.net/blog/2011/11/winning-hearts-and-minds/

Disclaimer - Link is to my own blog.



“Winning hearts and minds by [inconveniencing] working class folks. Brilliant.”

It’s one of the things that makes the pretensions of altruism so laughable. Having watched hours of video, much of it filmed by the protestors themselves, I haven’t seen much altruism, even less “social justice.” I’ve seen plenty of passive-aggression and role-play, a great deal of self-indulgence and demands for more of the same at someone else’s expense. (See almost any of the two dozen videos embedded or linked here over the last few weeks.) As typified by Calgary’s OccupodPeople, who demanded a free electricity supply before talking with local officials, citing “the right to use electrical devices, such as laptops.” They’re happy to demand imaginary rights (for themselves) and happy to impose on others, whether by obstruction, noise or displacing the bills for clean-up and extra policing. And the little dears expect free electricity. Because, hey, they’re that important.

Likewise, protestors who demand a bailout on the student loans they chose to undertake and now don’t wish to honour, while telling passers-by “we’re doing this for you.”

The obliviousness and bad faith are pretty hard to miss.

Goodbye Lenin

Have the monkeys who 'occupy' come to the conclusion that, assuming they get what they want and society is changed, then what's to stop any group changing it back again by doing all the same things all over again? You know that compelling mix of abuse, violence, defecation and drumming.

Or is society to be changed so much that either we wouldn't ever want to have anything but what these people demand, or henceforth would dissent (and therefore change) be banned?

I think I know the answer.


I haven’t seen much altruism, even less “social justice.”

Another one for the list.

"Graffiti have been scratched and painted on to the great west doors of the cathedral, the chapter house door and most notably a sacrilegious message painted on the restored pillars of the west portico. Human defecation has occurred in the west portico entrance and inside the cathedral on several occasions."


Let's see them try that with a mosque.



The “occupiers” non-reciprocal mindset has been noted many times. And so when people are foolish enough to indulge the “occupiers” in the hope that this will minimise any bother – say, by giving permission to temporarily obstruct St Paul’s – the courtesy will not be reciprocated. When finally asked to leave by the people on whom they impose, they won’t. Instead, they’ll cling to their delusions of geo-political importance and “defend” their intrusion against the people on whom they intrude.

Remember the basic rule:

Whatever they do, however they treat people, they are always the victims (and therefore righteous and entitled). It’s always about them. Other people are just furniture, a backdrop to the psychodrama.



sackcloth and ashes

'I am sure there was a Monty Python sketch where some mafia-type gangsters told an British army officer that it would be a shame if one of his tanks got broken if he didn't do what they said'.

1:50 in ...




Steven Hayward at Powerline:

"Numerous observers have pointed out how the media and liberals (sorry for the redundancy) lavished sympathy on Occupy Wall Street until it became untenable to continue, after which they began to airbrush their previous encomia. They seem to forget that what begins as Woodstock somehow always ends up as Altamont."


The flashbacks to the fawning over Woodstock are quite funny. The revolution is always coming.


demanded a free electricity supply… citing “the right to use electrical devices, such as laptops.”

But free speech equals free electricity!


The "Occupy" people aren't interested in anything other than replacing the West's current incentive structure with a different - feudally-inspired - one. They propose that we rid ourselves of a system where work, productivity, and responsibility are rewarded in a free exchange of value with a system where sycophancy and ideological purity is rewarded in a forced cycle of institutionalized theft and dependency. And no matter how many historical examples you give them that this type of "revolution" inevitably ends with systematic genocide, they continue to insist it'll be different this time. Well, that, and they insist that THEY won't be killed....it'll be someone else.

Send these fools to "Occupy Kolyma" for winter and see how much they like "revolution".

The comments to this entry are closed.

Amazon Link