babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
I believe it has been several days since I have given Torontonians a hearty mock. Are youse due again?
I was only making the point that you know at least one luminary. This guy. You're welcome.
@Tommy & SJ I overheard a woman giving a municipal politican (Vancouver Votes 2011! Woo!) what for simply for walking around with promotional buttons with her name it. I don't even think she was distributing them (although she probably would have given on if you asked). The complainant's point was that any attempt to self-promote, even a subdued one, comes too close to co-optation. I think she was on to something.
Maybe I am tactless above, in terms of the NDP. Thinking about it, I know there are individual members, some who I have met, some who I have worked for, who are decent people who feel like we do and are doing their damndest. And, I won't admit to saying so, but on local issues there are Liberal and (ulp!) Conservatives who side with people.
But what the fuck happens in our Legislatures and in Ottawa? Where does that get lost?
It's the system, maaaan.
Political parties have-- even if they want to change the system, or tweek it-- bought into it wholesale, they represent the system.
And let's look at our system. It's a parliamentary system developed by Elgin to contain the "mob". A sort of "democracy if necessary, but not neccesarily democracy." It was developed to keep the establisment in power, and a system evolved so that any radical change would be bogged down, shut down or otherwise thwarted.
It's a system based on the pony express being the fastest form of mail. When it took two weeks to go from London to Toronto. The age of sail, of the horse... with steam power being something new.
Things move a little faster today. Political parties and the machinery of legislating cannot cope--- even if it wanted to.
That's why we are seeing movements-- the Arab Spring-- the Occupy movement--- the anti-Corruption movement in India spring up from the streets, because change is needed faster than the process of "change from within" can provide.
This is particularly accute in British Parliamentary systems that are designed above all else, to prevent change unwanted by the established power structures.
Is a politician's mere presence at an 'Occupy' event to be viewed as suspect and an attempt at co-option? You can go too far with this. It would be difficult to castigate politicians for not listening, and at the time barring them from your protests because you fear co-option. I'd suggest that this is a question of degrees. Bob Rae would clearly love to co-opt the movement, and has been roundly mocked for his never wandering far from the media vans in Toronto. I'd humbly suggest there's an acceptable middle ground between his antics and not showing up at all. Barring or lecturing people who aren't necessarily in lock-step with the movement speaks to concerns about the frailty of such a movement.
Does anybody know Lawrence McCurry and why he is saying this?
http://canadiandimension.com/articles/4228/
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/why-occupy-wall-stre...
Something I came across today.
I saw this interview a few days ago. It's ten minutes-- but it's not necessary to listen to it all.
Ventura says a lot of good things here.... but there's the unabashed self promotion.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58FlcqRE1Aw
Jonah Schein was there, too. And Olivia Chow looked overjoyed by what was going on.
This is a very important issue for the NDP that you raise, Tommy. Several of us among the NDP base are at least sympathetic to the Occupy movements, if not actively involved ourselves. For this reason, I think it is important that the NDP find some way to connect with the movement, to channel it into something more. You articulately pointed out how the NDP boxed itself out of these kinds of movements, and the difficulty of the NDP becoming involved, but I think this is something the NDP must do, and that the consequences for the NDP would be far worse if they ignored this movement.
Yes, and we have to consider that if we treat the rich poorly, they may just up and leave our society and start one of their own. Then where would we be?
Found this today.
http://howconservativesdrovemeaway.blogspot.com/2011/10/occupy-wall-stre...
"Bailouts, subsidies, tax breaks, special rights and privileges, regulations designed to restrict competition—to name a few of the many ways the government protects and stimulates corporate interests, and those things are every bit as anti-free market as, not to mention directly related to, the high taxes and excessive bureaucracy that gets Tea Partiers riled up. In other words, aren't these two groups—Occupy Wall Street and the Tea Party—raging against different halves of the same machine? Do I have to draw a Venn diagram here?"
I think one of the Occupy protesters signs, widely reproduced in the MSM, sums it up best: "CEO pay up 144%. How about you?"
Student and blogger (oh, and reeeeaaally lame rapper), huh? Do you get grants or loans for school? Or is mommy paying for everything? 'Cuz it used to be you could get out of college and your debts wouldnt be so high that you would have to declare bankruptcy if you didnt get a 60k+ job within 6 months.
Lame tweets, too, dude. "Occupy a job," huh, huh, daz funnee I nevah hurd dat one before. I was there and i work my ass off pal. How about you. Do you even launder your own shorts?
1% huh? Happens all the time: over 200,000 came out on a bitterly cold January day to protest against the 2nd Iraq invasion. That's more like 10% of Toronto population. While occupy was going on, 28,000 were simultaneously gathering to protest a quarry which will screw up the water supply for a million people in this province. There's your 1%
Block traffic on a Saturday morning, really, that's all you got? Those FIENDS!
Gotta ask, is that your face on the video on youtube? Or are you just trying to hide the fact that you're from the suburbs and still have your bum wiped for you? 'Cuz I'm thinking using the N word in a rap is a pretty dangerous move for a soft pink rich kid.
To quote from Risky Business:
"Go to school. Go learn something."
To quote from Spike Lee:
"What do you know 'bout me? Y'all can't even pee straight."
People are a little scared of revolutions, unless they are revolutionaries. Governments, of course, are especially scared. A lot of the negativity Occupy is going to get is going to come from this fear.
The actual 1% really have nothing to fear, so long as the demonstrations remain peaceful. China has something like 30,000 strikes and protests a year, and they know how to suppress them very well. The Chinese Communist Party is there to stay. They will exterminate half their own population if they feel it is necessary. And they have the means to. For thousands of years tiny governments have been able to suppress whole populations. In that respect, nothing has changed.
A large number of people within the 99% are not going to support the Occupy movement, even if the Occupy leaders imply they represent the whole 99%. They will back the 1% and the State. Some through self-interest, some through loyalty, and some through fear.
I am really afraid this is not going to end well. In the US, if Occupy turns into a second revolution, the revolutionaries have the right to bear arms, and may be able to force the State into a standoff. Right now, most of the gun people are with the Tea Party, so the State doesnt have to worry too much. If the Tea Party joins up with the OWS, things are really going to change. Not only that, but the US state was formed in rebellion and revolution, so some more is not out of the ordinary. The cat, as it were, is out of the bag. Not Canada. As in the UK, it is about the Authorities, who WILL prevail.
Ironically the people here in the Occupy are also among the most ardent supporters of gun control, which means they will have no means to defend themselves if the state, in all its power, goes to the streets as well. Here, only the police, military, and the criminals have guns. Given the order to start firing, they will. This is what frightens me. I don't want to die before my kids get to know me better.
In Canada, we had the Upper Canada Rebellion, Riel, the Winnipeg General Strike, and the FLQ. All of those uprisings were put down mercilessly by governments of all political stripes. If this gets out of hand, the Crown will prevail. That is what the Crown is for, as a backstop to eternal political Authority. Oh I guess now we know why the Armed Forces got the Royal put back in. They were expecting trouble.
So if you consider yourself a leftist and you are a monarchist and/or a gun control supporter, you are supporting the two most effective tools the State has to suppress you. You are really not a leftist but a faux-leftist who likes to use ideological trickery to lull the population, so that you will continue not to be bothered. Just post a few times here and vote NDP and up the workers!!!
And whoever the troll was that said that abolishing the Monarchy was not a 'High Priority', I hope they are happy now. Now, you can see the real reason for the Crown. And whoever believes in gun control, way not to have a revolution and surrender to the state. When the state and the criminals have all the guns, they can do whatever they want to you. Or make you do anything just by pointing one at you.
All of this is proving that I have probably been right. The State curtails freeedom. Now you are going to see how. The problem is not 'the rich' or 'the bourgeoisie' or any other political rhetoric designed to demonize one sector of the population over the other. The problem is Government. As it always has been. Until Government is severely curtailed it will bail out banks and wage wars and do whatever the hell it wants.
Go home. You are in the wrong country.
OK I will try this again. Does anybody know this guy and why he might be saying this when nobody else is (or at least that I can find).
There was one more thing that kind of freaked me out. As I was leaving the media tent I spotted a woman who I recognized from many protests around town, she is a blogger for a popular alternative news site. After introducing myself, I asked her if she still wrote for that site and she said she did. I then asked her "as a journalist, are you not concerned with the lack of transparency in this movement?" What happened next made me feel like I was in the body snatchers film. She replied with "Go away, you're scaring me with your aggressive language, and I don't wish to talk with you anymore!" What??? I was shocked. Surly this woman had seen me around at other events as I her? How was asking her this question aggressive in any shape or form? I left the park more disturbed than I have ever been from a day of protest with maybe the exception of the day of the G-20.
This Friday, I'm helping to lead Shabbat services for the Occopy Toronto folks. 5 o'clock in St. James Park. Look for the "School Tent"
The Rebellions of 1837-1838 (including the Lower Canada Rebellion) eventually lead to representative self-government (or responsible government), which was a key demand of the participants in both rebellions. I wouldn't put the October Crisis in the same list as either the Winnipeg General Strike or the Rebellions of 1837-38.
Arrival of Mohawks Takes Occupy Up a Notch - by Ezra Levant
http://www.torontosun.com/2011/10/31/arrival-of-mohawks-takes-occupy-up-...
"...Do you think they'll enforce the law if Mohawk warriors bring their machine guns to downtown Toronto?
Or do you think they'll pull another Oka or Caledonia - just cut a big cheque to the criminals and give them the park."
vile lies and trash from Ezra the levitating ant
Some yurts have illuminated a problem.
This is not what democracy looks like.
Why? Why not?
Assuming that these are accurate quotes:
This is a clear duplication of the society we already have. If anyone doesn't see that this is a huge problem and is steeped in classism, exclusion, lack of solidarity and middle-class ignorance and righteousness, then we will have to agree to disagree.
Other "Occupy" movements deal with the issue of displacing homeless folks in entirely different ways. This is important since most of the Occupy locations across North America are in places where homeless folks usually gather/stay/live. And yeah, some of the homeless folks have issues with substance use. So? So do some of the occupiers. So do some of the bankers. Do you see where I'm going with this?
While I reject the mainstream's expected, predictable and rather mundane critiques, it's important to hear critiques from within the movement, the left and other marginalized positions.
Saying that certain spaces are for some people and not others, especially when those "others" are the people who live in the park all year round, and, one could argue, those who feel the effects of class oppression every fucking day, shows a level of disconnection and lack of inclusion that demands comment, critique and change. This is what I mean when I say they are duplicating the society that we're in already.
I support, as an ally, the Occupy, (Re) Occupy and the Decolonize movements across North America and in the rest of the world, but there must be a way to challenge oppressive actions when they happen.
Toronto isn't alone. Occupy Santa Fe did the same thing (look under II, Reports from the Safety Group).
Yeah, we should postpone fighting against the 1% until we have resolved all the contradictions among the 99%.
Yup. Raising one significant social concern in opposition to another one. We'll have to agree to disagree.
I never said to postpone, Unionist, but thanks for the lack of respect.
Ok, let me be crystal clear about this:
While the Occupy movement is ongoing, I want to see the allies (you and me and most of the world) hailing and supporting it - unconditionally.
For example, I've spent a lot of time fighting for health and safety in the workplace (and elsewhere). If I hear that someone is trying to dismantle an Occupy encampment on hygiene grounds, I don't even stop to ask whether there's some merit to the concern. I reach for my figurative weapon.
When Lisa Raitt is trying to crush some workers' struggle, I don't want to hear about how one worker made a racist/sexist/homophobic comment about another worker (or manager) on one of the picket lines once somewhere, and how the union isn't taking effective action to stop that. I want to just support them - unconditionally.
When the Afghan people are fighting to expel foreign invaders, I don't want to hear Western so-called allies debating which faction to support or critiquing Afghan attitudes toward women or westerners or foreigners or LGBT folks etc. That's just the way I am.
I recognize that this is a fundamentally different approach from that taken by some others in the left. My approach isn't 100% and universal in all circumstances. I absolutely respect those of good faith who take the other approach. They may even be right for all I know.
But I will introspectively tell you this much. Wherever it comes from - nature, nurture, who knows - I am left at my advanced age with this very stubborn sentiment: That those who are in struggle against the common enemy will enjoy my support and respect, and I will not throw stones from the sidelines. When the focus of the struggle changes, what was stones may need to become boulders.
Hope that explains where I'm coming from.
As Masie has said herself she did not suggest postponing anything. What she is suggesting is that any progressive movement needs to be critically reflective to the extent that they have awareness around when they are replicating oppressive behaviours and attitudes that we are opposing. If a movement is doing that then it is not fighting the status quo. Historically we know that we do not just want to replace one heirchal power and exclusionary system with another. The occupy movement has been vocal about being inclusive it needs to walk the talk.
It is important also to note that not only are we are fighting we are building, we are building an alternative and in doing so we have to be open to internal critique, those of us with privilege and power need to be critically aware of when we are operating from that power and privilege. Speaking from personal experience this is not easy but I believe it is necessary. IF something is difficult that is often an indiczation that it is also necessary.
To me the way that we relate to the most marginalized in society is crucial and is not something we need to wait for until the revolution is over, to me it is the revolution.
As Maysie has pointed out the space that is being "occupied" already had occupants (not only in terms of colonial history). Anyone who has done street outreach has an understanding that on the street that is the home of those who are without homes and needs to be respected. If the movement was not aware of this than it is a major oversight.
I am writing this as someone who is a strong supporter of the movement and has been inspired. I have been down there and wish I actually had more time to help out and also help address this issue.
And as much as I understand where you are coming from in regard to the issue of certain tactics being employed at demonstrations...I just can't seem to locate any agreement with your position. It seems to me that if you can't unconditionally support the various approaches that might emerge from a crowd representing various types of injustice...why say anything negative at all. Why not take the position that while they don't represent you by employing certain types of actions, the results are understandable. Why this two-tiered clarification?
Oh, I understand, SJ. If someone comes along trying to sabotage a struggle, I condemn them as being lined up with the enemy - even if they are shouting slogans more radical than any poet laureate could possibly invent.