We have met the enemy and he is us. – Walt Kelly
I was never very happy with the Labor movement’s co-opting an existing holiday with an established apolitical significance for its own purposes, especially since the event it wished to commemorate did not occur on May 1st, but rather May 4th. Sex worker rights activists have several such days, but we didn’t feel the need to steal somebody else’s holiday. Nor should it matter that the 1st is arguably a more memorable day of the month than some other nearby date; Independence Day, Guy Fawkes Day and Cinco de Mayo seem to be quite popular without having been moved to the 1st of July, November and May respectively.
To make things worse, the initial theft kicked off a sort of karmic cascade of theft and re-theft; communist governments stole it from the labor movement using the ludicrous but oft-repeated justification that they were the anointed representatives of “the workers”; then in 1958 the United States Congress attempted to steal the day from the communists by declaring it “Loyalty Day” in the US (because, as Radley Balko aptly observed, “…nothing celebrates ‘freedom’ like a presidential proclamation encouraging the citizenry to declare their loyalty to the government!” (The presidential proclamation to which he refers is one of the more peculiar aspects of the thing; it’s required every year, and Obama did his bit right on cue this May 1st). And now the Occupy folks, in an historically tone-deaf gesture which ignored the tremendous death toll of the communist regimes most closely associated with the day in living memory, are trying to steal it back for their iteration of the labor movement; they were, however, outdone by the NYPD, which seems intent on cementing the day’s association with brutally repressive regimes by re-enacting their behavior:
…activist Zachary Dempster said that six NYPD officers broke down the door of his…apartment at around 6:15am [on April 30th]…armed with a warrant for the arrest of his roommate…for a six-year-old open container violation. But Dempster believes this was an excuse to check in on him, as he’d been arrested in February at an Occupy Wall Street Party that was broken up by cops, and charged with assaulting a police office and inciting a riot…”They asked what I was doing tomorrow, and if I knew of any activities, any events—that was how the conversation started,” Dempster said…About an hour later, an activist friend of Dempster’s…said his apartment…was visited by six NYPD cops—possibly the same ones. The activist said police used arrest warrants for two men who no longer lived there as pretext for the raid…[they] ran the IDs of everyone who was in the apartment, then booked [Gawker’s] source when they discovered he had an outstanding open container violation. Police never asked about Occupy Wall Street or May Day, but…the message was clear: We’re watching you.
As Balko said, “Think about what just happened, here. On a day strongly associated with the old Soviet bloc, armed government agents staged early morning raids on the homes of suspected political dissidents, detained them, then interrogated them about their plans and political affiliations.” Of course, it isn’t just political dissidents that get the Stasi treatment; being accused of having leaves of a common plant the government says you aren’t allowed to have, or of being on the wrong side of an imaginary line, will result in even more horrifying abuse:
When we hear a terrible story about abuses by law enforcement — like, say, a college student arrested for smoking marijuana, abandoned in a DEA holding cell for five days without food or water, and reduced to drinking his own urine and attempting suicide with a shard of glass — often our first instinct is to say “that can’t be right” or “there must be more to that story” or “that guy is making it up” or, at least, “what a bizarre, freakish event.” Our society encourages these reactions. Our society does not encourage the reaction “yep, that’s the way our criminal justice system works.” It ought to. The truth is, that is how our criminal justice system works…Detainees are denied even minimal medical care until their penis has to be amputated and they die of cancer. Defendants arrested for marijuana possession are sentenced to certain death in jail facilities completely unable to address their medical needs. Cops shoot family dogs like small-time sociopathic villains in a Tarentino movie. Cops tase and pepper spray handicapped kids and grandmothers in their beds. And we allow it all. We put up with it. We don’t demand that politicians take it seriously. We continue, as a society, to welcome law-and-order pablum from our leaders…What the fuck is wrong with us?
I mentioned the East German secret police above, but the establishment which runs the American police state is actually more like that of a slightly earlier German regime; the name for a militarized government unbound by law and controlled by an unholy symbiosis of political and business interests is “fascism”. Here’s a perfect example of it in action:
The nation’s largest private prison company, the Corrections Corporation of America, is [now] …offering to buy [states’] prisons outright. To ensure their profitability, the corporation insists that it be guaranteed that the prisons be kept at least 90 percent full…The Corrections Corporation of America’s filings…read very much like the documents of a slave-trader. Investors are warned that profits would go down if the demand for prisoners declines. That is, if the world’s largest police state shrinks, so does the corporate bottom line. Dangers to profitability include “relaxation of enforcement efforts, leniency in conviction or parole standards and sentencing practices or through the decriminalization of certain activities that are currently proscribed by our criminal laws…any changes with respect to drugs and controlled substances or illegal immigration could affect the number of persons arrested, convicted, and sentenced, thereby potentially reducing demand for correctional facilities to house them.” At the Corrections Corporation of America, human freedom is a dirty word…
But the corporate branch of the ruling class isn’t just content to demand that more people be abducted and caged; it’s eager to supply the tools by which they can be rounded up and framed for “crimes” as well:
…the business of marketing drones to law enforcement is booming…and…the language of combat and conflict remains an important part of their sales pitch…the drone…industry proved its clout in February when Congress mandated the FAA open U.S. airspace to drones [massing up to 2 kilograms] starting this year…Larger drones will be eligible to fly in U.S. airspace by 2015…weaponized unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs)…[can] provide complete surveillance of an area and engage suspects with buckshot, tear gas [and] grenades…According to documents published…by Electronic Frontier Foundation, 22 of the [56 domestic government agencies now authorized to operate drones]…are primarily law enforcement departments, while another 24 entities (mainly universities) have law enforcement functions under them…
On May 2nd the ACLU unveiled its “nightmare scenario” in which improved coordination software and analytics and greatly increased flight duration (all of which are inevitable in the next few years) enable around-the-clock surveillance of essentially the entire population, permitted by the same politicians and judges who have allowed all the abuses listed above and the rampant civil rights violations we’ve discussed previously. Remember what I said about universal criminality? The NYPD used the excuse of a 6-year-old open container violation (the same level of offense as a traffic ticket) to justify literally smashing down a citizen’s door at dawn, and they could do the same to anyone reading this on American soil; if you’re on foreign soil instead, they can simply brand you a “terrorist” and fire a drone-carried missile at you.
In the past 90 years, the United States had two great enemies, the Axis Powers and the Communist Bloc. And despite the expenditure of untold funds and countless lives, we actually lost both of those wars despite our apparent victories. Our real enemy was never a particular group of human beings, but rather the twisted belief that individual human beings are things to be owned and used by the state. Totalitarianism is like an evil spirit possessing a nation, and cannot be defeated by force of arms because it will simply move on to a new host. The only defense against it is absolute rejection of its underlying premise: that it is acceptable and even moral for “authorities” to abrogate the rights of individuals for a “greater purpose” or the “common good”. In our struggle to defeat oppressive collectivist states, we lost sight of who we were and what our country stood for, and have now become what we struggled so fiercely against.
One Year Ago Today
“May Miscellanea (Part One)” presented articles on Slutwalks, surprisingly non-judgmental coverage of hookers being robbed, and the inevitable result of governmental attempts to legislate “sex offenders” out of existence.
“In the past 90 years, the United States had two great enemies, the Axis Powers and the Communist Bloc. And despite the expenditure of untold funds and countless lives, we actually lost both of those wars despite our apparent victories. ”
Deep sigh….That’s it. You’ve lost me for good now. I’m gone from here. Have a nice life and enjoy your illustrated genesis.
I think she’s simply saying that after combating the Axis Powers and the Soviets (in the name of “freedom”) – we’re fast becoming those demons we fought against.
I agree with her on that.
That’s exactly what I’m saying; I’m not sure why Darren chose to misinterpret both this statement and the last one he willfully misinterpreted. Since he’s an intelligent man, I have to wonder if he wasn’t sort of doing it on purpose. 🙁
Probably because the degree to which we’re an overbearing police state is incomparably smaller than that of the two regimes indicated – and, despite all fears, we do have significant roadblocks making this not a slippery slope.
This level of hyperbole reads as hysteria, not rhetoric.
And even if it is rhetoric – which is more likely – it’s obnoxious rhetoric.
“Our real enemy was never a particular group of human beings, but rather the twisted belief that individual human beings are things to be owned and used by the state. ”
This. We’ve always had people who believed that, they’ve just been called different things. Nobles. Capitalists. We still have them, and they always use their wealth, often gained in unscrupulous ways, to corrupt the government.
Cops are simply their attack dogs. Cops will always act to protect the interests of the rich, justice be damned.
Recently I read of a case where the cops, the hired thugs of the rich, beat a man to death, on camera. No, the man wasn’t fighting back, he didn’t raise a hand against them. The city got sued, and the family of the man won a million dollars. Now where is that million coming from? Oh, the city will take it out of budgets for schools, libraries, programs for the poor and kids. The cops will never lose a penny of pay.
Cops claim to be professionals, let’s make it so. Let’s require individual cops to carry malpractice insurance, and to be sued personally, Better yet, let’s tear down the entire organization of cops. It’s too corrupt to save.
Yes, Communism resulted in a death toll, and horrors. It was just another form of top down control, of the wealthy and powerful controlling the rest. Not so different from the goon squad kicking in doors now, as you rightly point out.
When I was young, that older meaning of May Day still lingered around the country, the scandalous old pagan fertility festival, reeking of sex. It should very much be a whore’s holiday.
My grandfather was a railroad man, and a proud union member, and I was raised to appreciate the unions. In school, I learned of the docker’s strike, the match girl strike, and how unions came about, and why. I’ve seen what a industrial revolution era mill looked like, and learned of the abuses there.
But I’m not sure the old union vs.owners model works so much anymore. I believe the workers ought be the owners. I believe ever company, every business beyond a sole proprietorship ought be employee, or co-op owned. There are many advantages to that, and it would build a much better economy.
I think there is a genuine need for law enforcement and good people to do it. I just think that law enforcement needs to be drastically scaled back. First, get rid of the prohibitionist laws so cops aren’t running around as a bunch of “morality police” – like the Taliban use in Afghanistan. We don’t need that shit. Second – scale back all that damned hardware. Seriously man, why should ANY cop have an HK G36c in his patrol car? Yet – many do. Drones? WTF dude? Get rid of that shit.
Right now they’re encouraged to be the Empire’s Storm Troopers – so they act that way and they attract those kinds of jerks to the club. Scale them back, give them a limited mission – like Andy and Barney on Mayberry R.F.D. – I loved those guys. I think we can get there again one day.
There is certainly a genuine need, but the problem is that any profession in which men are encouraged to use force attracts bullies, and unless those bullies are controlled by a code and dire consequences they become the majority. The cops have become military, whether we call them so or not; we might as well call them so and subject them to the harshness of the UCMJ, which will send them to prison for things that aren’t even crimes for the general population, and subject them to speedy trials in which there’s a much greater chance of conviction than exoneration. Then let’s see how many of them volunteer for a low-paying job once their assaults, rapes and murders have real consequences.
“What need we fear, when none can call our power to account?”
That was said in another context, but then again things didn’t work out so well the for the one who said it in the end.
You can’t really subject them to the UCMJ, Maggie – unless you make them military. I know that’s what you’re suggesting but then doing so kind of negates one of the reasons we stated in the Declaration of Independence for breaking with England.
I don’t think you really want them to be “military”. Nobody wants to accept that the nation is policed by it’s military. And besides – that would federalize ALL police officers – completely removing them control of the states. And worse – they’d all be out there enforcing 50 different legal codes according to the state they were stationed in. This is a recipe for disaster.
I might suggest they all be placed under the control of each State’s governors – and each state should have a “UCMJ-like” charter to govern, enforce, and punish police conduct. See – I don’t know – when I was in the military – we put bad Sailors in jail if they did something wrong and the police could be fixed if they just did this. By the way – it’s a MYTH that military courts are easier to gain a conviction in – I have a lot of experience with this and military courts can be a real circus. But – on the whole – I think most of the bad apples get put away.
By the way – I do agree with a lot of what you are saying. I mentioned that I’m an extra in a movie and I was talking to the guy on the set who’s in charge of the weapons we’re using (we’re shooting blanks but using real tactical machine guns) … anyway, the guy’s name is “Rock” and he introduced himself to me by saying … “I retired from the LAPD back when we could still violate people’s civil rights.”
Not sure if he was making a joke – or if he was proud of that. Anyway – I didn’t laugh. Oh – and he was a former Marine too.
There have been and continue to be enough military atrocities that I’m not sure this would be any good. Sure, if the UCMJ were properly enforced on cops, that would be great. But then, if the laws and rules they’re already supposed to follow were properly enforced, nothing else would be needed.
There may be a need, but our current policing structure doesn’t fill it.
I’m reminded of a night when my partner and I were strolling along Canal Street, the “Gay” part of Manchester. Two police constables were walking their beat, a man and a woman. We stopped, and had a bit of pleasant conversation. I mentioned that I had lived in the states, and the male PC was quite interested, had always wanted to visit. After they walked on, I noticed that they chatted with lots of people, in an easy, relaxed way. They were unarmed. It came to me that by being friendly and approachable, they were integrating themselves with the community, and that they were really getting a sense of who’s who, and what’s going on. They were policing. (Not that British police are anywhere near perfect.) They didn’t have attitudes.
Now the US- A friend and her daughter were visiting Chicago, and were lost, needed directions to the train station downtown. They approached a cop, and asked him the way.
“Whadda I look like, a map?” He snarled, and turned away. He was well armed.
Guns give bullies attitudes. Perhaps regular street patrol ought to be unarmed.
Yes, they should be. When it’s time to storm the building* let them have a fucking arsenal of the best weapons money can buy, but they don’t need to be fulfilling their juvenile Wyatt Earp fantasies while just walking around.
* And please, let’s restrict storming buildings to things like hostage rescue and bomb-makers, not pot smokers or hookers.
comixchik: there was a YouTube video going the rounds a few weeks ago. It was CCTV footage of a man being beaten to death by the cops, though I don’t know if it was the same case as the one you describe.
My father was a member of a union – when he worked the smelter at a copper company. He was unimpressed with most of his co-workers who would actively sabotage work efforts to hold down production. They were afraid that if anyone did a decent day’s work, then they’d all have to.
He and his buddy routinely emptied an ore car in a single 8 hour shift – by hand shovel because that was before they had dump cars. It usually took 2 guys 3 full shifts to do it. And they faced unofficial sanctions for “working too hard.”
Later, when he was at US Steel, they Steelworkers went out on strike for the longest strike to that date. And when they came back to work, the union actually settled for less than the company originally offered. The following month, the union raised the dues they were taking out of their paychecks. That’s when he got disgusted with the whole thing and went back to college.
The problem in the old days was an alliance between business and gov’t. Today it’s an alliance between business and gov’t and and gov’t and unions. With the taxpayer footing the bill in both cases.
And I take issue with your view of what is acceptable in a business enterprise. Your approach would dispense with the Wright Brothers, Apple, Hewlett-Packard, Warner Brothers, Chanel, Microsoft, Johnson and Johnson as just some examples of businesses that were started with two partners rather than a sole proprietorship.
Limited liability corporations date back to the Renaissance. Very few people outside of the nobility – and the nobles thought that anything to do with trade was demeaning – had the means to take the risks required to start a business or conduct trade. Limited liability corporations were mutual associations that addressed these issues and allowed larger endeavors to be attempted than individuals alone could finance.
If cooperatives want to get together and run a business, more power to them. If associations of workers want to do the same, then let them have at it. But if you introduce gov’t force into this on either side of your proposal – either to prohibit non-sole proprietorships or to encourage co-ops, you will get unintended consequences.
I think that the most likely outcome would be a flattening of economic activity and long range planning as described by the work of Hernando de Soto, an economist who specializes in analyzing the “informal economy” that persists in places where property rights are not recorded or respected like the slums of Rio de Janeiro and various other corrupt regimes, particularly in Latin America.
The standard of social interaction should be mutual exchange among consenting adults to mutual benefit. And those parties to that exchange, barring negative externalities, are the ones who get to evaluate what that means, not some third party gov’t busybody. And it doesn’t matter whether that exchange is money for goods, bodily fluids, labor for compensation or any combination (and more) of the preceding.
You want the gov’t to regulate economic activities. Conservatives want to regulate personal sexual activities. There is no moral distinction between these two intrusions, merely a difference in the targets presented for gov’t functionaries.
The owners have always abused workers, and workers have always had their small rebellions, been as lazy as they could be, done small sabotages.
Those partnerships you mention grew into large corporations, which then ought to have been employee owned.
And yes, there have been corporations for quite a while, and they have been corrupt for quite a while. Look at the East India or Hudson Bay Companies.
Your story reminds me of that of my paternal grandfather (Maman‘s late husband), who was an intellectual and a socialist back in the 1930s. He was a staunch supporter of Huey Long’s (I now own his cherished copy of Every Man a King), though he didn’t think Long went far enough toward communism. Because of his superior intellect and intelligence (though he lacked a degree) he was made a member of management at the plant which employed about 90% of the people in my home town, and tirelessly worked to represent the interests of workers to the company’s owners; for this the workers liked and respected him.
Then in the early 1950s there was a long and acrimonious strike, and union officials insisted he be targeted for harassment along with all the other members of management (no doubt to “send a message”), and the union members mindlessly obeyed. Roofing nails were strewn into his driveway, my father, uncle and aunt were bullied by workers’ kids on order of their fathers, their house was pelted with eggs, etc. It broke my grandfather’s heart, and he never recovered his spirit; in Maman‘s opinion it contributed to the decline which culminated in his death from lung cancer in 1960.
As my grandfather learned to his chagrin, there is nothing noble about “the workers”, any more than about any other human beings; ANY group which bullies, harms and violates the right of others is evil, whether that group is labelled a “government”, “the police”, “religion”, a “labor union”, a “corporation” or whatever other fancy title you can dream up. Oppression is oppression and tyranny is tyranny, and I am the implacable foe of any form of it over individuals or weaker groups no matter what their excuse.
Maggie – tell me why in the fuck this kid arrested for marijuana and starved for five days is so important?
Who cares about that homeboy? Seriously. We got MUCH BIGGER problems – like, for instance, Secret Service Agents drinking alcohol and hiring hookers and what not.
I mean – as an American, I only have a few brain cells and I like to keep on point – and attentive to the IMPORTANT THINGS. Dope smokers getting locked up in Federal Dungeons is background noise, Maggie.
Let’s please tighten this up in the future – okay?
/ sarcasm. 😀
My comment is merely a small one on the increasingly common use of excessive force by law enforcement on specially challenged and disabled individuals. Aside from the shame of it, does anyone really think about the message that it sends to the broader culture? I mean if heavily armed and armored police are doing such horrid things to the weakest and most defenseless among us then what comes next?
And as the husband and father of a special needs wife and three special needs kids I’m reminded more each day that a call for help that is heard by the police will bring the calvary alright – although it could very well bring them charging right over us leaving broken and shattered lives behind.
About a month ago, a police officer pulled us over. The suburban had an expired inspection sticker. The kids wanted to say hi to the cool policeman. After it was over I had a sick feeling inside. He was a wretched creature whose only presence was in the bristling weaponry he carried. My kids sat in silence for a long time afterward probably wondering why the police man never answered nor acknowledged them. And honestly, a part of me knew fear for them because the true meaning of “to serve and protect” no longer applies to persons like them. Or to me.
Bullies always pick hardest on the weakest. I’ll never forget what Jeff told me about how the cops treated him much more respectfully when they thought he was a felon than when they had given him traffic tickets.
EXCEPT FOR HARLEY RIDING COPS, Maggie! I’ve said this before – they’re nice dudes! In fact, the last one that gave me a ticket was all smiles and apologized for having to write me a ticket – but he did point out that my “fines” would be put to good use in building and repairing highway infrastructure in Louisiana.
In fact, that ticket was so pleasant for me I forgot about it until a week after I was supposed to pay it. I had to go directly to the Livingston Parish Sheriff’s Office to pay the fine. This turned out to be a good thing – and if you’re a guy driving on I-12 through Livingston Parish – HAMMER DOWN DUDE! And go in and pay that fine in person! Why? Because Livingston Parish has 12 … count them … 12 HOT SHERIFF’S DEPUTIES working that office! When I say “hot” – I mean they are really off my personal “Krulac scale for hotness” – on a 1-10 on my scale – these chicks were … 13’s???! And they were nice as shit to me personally – because they completely erased the bench warrant out on me and no fine for that either.
Now somebody who lives in Louisiana go to the Livingston Parish Sheriff’s office (in the courthouse) and just stop by and ask for directions to McDonalds or something – then come back here and tell me I’m lying!! LOL!!
http://truth-out.org/news/item/8912-new-police-strategy-in-new-york-sexual-assault-against-peaceful-protestors
Of course it’s not really a new strategy, just new victims who didn’t realize it was always in the police toolkit.
It used to bother my father ( a police captain ) that non-dangerous people who broke certain non-violent laws would often be treated far more harshly then actual dangerous thugs. When I asked him why that was, he shrugged and said, “Judges can be intimidated.”
An open container violation. I had to Google this to find out what it was; and now I wonder how many criminals there are taking their empties to the recycling facilities.
That most superior race, the English, have always held their police and judiciary in the highest esteem. Sadly, their Metropolitan Police (Greater London) police were corrupt during the 1970s; and even today there are investigations into their behavior, including accepting bribes from journalists. An inquiry into the bungled Stephen Lawrence investigation described them as “institutionally racist”. Following the publication of Ludovic Kennedy’s Book “10 Rillington Place” even the impartiality of the judiciary has been questioned. The trial judge in that case, Lord Goddard, was heavily criticised for his summing up. Lord Goddard apparently got “pleasure” when sentencing young men to be be birched or to be hanged: he ejaculated. More recently, the Criminal Conviction Review Board has dealt with very many cases of wrongful conviction. An alarming number of cases have been investigated, and far too many convictions have been found to be unsafe. Only today, a young man had his conviction for murder quashed. He presented his defence as alibi; but the cops didn’t feel it worthwhile to investigate this. He spent seven years in jail.
Working people “stealing” May Day? Impossible. Unless all those people reveling and dancing around the May Pole were all rich as hell, such a scenario is implausable. They can’t steal what already belongs to them.
And as for all those people dying, well King Leopold killed and tortured more people than Pol Pot did. He declared the Congo to be his private property, and millions died so he could extract the Congo’s riches. But of course, Leopold was a capitalist, so I guess that makes it a-okay!
Radley Balko was trying to make a point, but the point was lost in accusations againsts the demonstrators. I like libertarians for sticking up for sex workers rights, but they are so wrong on many other things that I can’t really join them. Sorry.
The worker’s rights movement is NOT “working people”, and more than feminism IS women. No movement has the right to speak for anyone who hasn’t chosen to be a member of it, except to say “these people need to be listened to”.
And come on, Susan, who the hell said the depredations of Leopold II were OK? Even in his own time there were lots of Americans and British publicly criticizing his actions. How does calling attention to one set of abuses constitute pronouncing others OK? Just because I tend to concentrate on the abuses perpetrated against sex workers doesn’t mean I think other state abuses (like executing innocent people)are OK, or that abuse by non-state entities (like exploitative brothel owners) is OK. Unless the Occupy movement was also trying to sanctify, say, King Leopold’s birthday, the comparison is a non sequitur.
My politics don’t exactly align with yours, but I have a great deal of respect for the fact that you stand up for some of the worst treated (by the state and its hangers on, particularly) workers in our society. I just thought I’d mention that. You deserve a lot of credit for writing so eloquently on the topic.
Thank you, PWS! I’m very pleased by the fact that I have readers from all over the political landscape:
If only we could get back to this. 🙁
I’m a federal employee – not for the job security, damn sure not for the money, but because this is the only job that allows me to do exciting things that are important while getting paid for it. If someone comes up with a “private adventure” company – let me know and I’ll bail on this job.
I’m NOT a union member and neither are most of the guys who work with me. This is the South – and most of us despise unions. I happen to even have a better reason though – since my Dad used to get shot at driving his pickup through a picket line in the 60’s. My Dad, like me – was not a college grad but he clawed his way into management and into a job that required a degree – he didn’t have one but no one questioned his ability to do that job. He started out as a chemical plant operator – was a dues paying member of the union because, back then, he had to be. That membership ended when he joined management and the fact that he had been a union member all those years didn’t stop his former “brothers” from trying to take his life.
THANK GOD we passed “right to work” laws here in the South to end the tyranny of the unions.
But, as a Federal Employee, even though I’m not a member of the union – THEY STILL SPEAK FOR ME? How the hell is that right? Where is my “freedom of choice” here?
Maggie, I’ve got to correct you. May 1, 1886, was the date of the Haymarket Square Massacre, where Chicago Police fired into a group of strikers and their families (McCormick Farm Machines if memory serves) who were picnicking in the square in a traditional celebration of May 1. The cops did so without provocation killing 4, and wounding at least 7. Three days later occurred the infamous Haymarket Riot, when during a gathering of laborers at a rally in Haymarket Square, someone–either an anarchist or a Pinkerton strikebreaker, trying to instigate police action–threw a bomb killing 4 police and wounding a dozen more. The police started shooting, killing 7, and injuring dozens more. The militia was called in. Several labor leaders were arrested, tried in one of the worst kangaroo courts in U.S. History, and the majority hanged. A newly elected governor, James Altgeld, succeeded in saving the two(?) survivors by commuting their sentences and pardoning them after a commission found no proof of guilt.
Are you sure about that? My source (with which Wikipedia agrees) says that the strike started on May 1st, the police gunfire was on May 3rd and the riot on May 4th.
You are correct on the dates. My mind compressed the times of the May Day demonstrations and the May 3 shootings, which is what I get for shooting off the top of my head from the library without the notes at home. However, the May 1st date was chosen NATIONWIDE because 1) it was a traditional bank holiday day off that everyone celebrated, 2) it was the day President Lincoln’s body arrived in Chicago in 1865. The German workers in Chicago were pro-Marx, and Marx considered the American Civil War a pivotal moment in history, both for freeing the black slaves, and establishing the eight hour day. It is the murder of the McCormick Strikers without provocation by the police that is important, and the possible-even probable-Pinkerton “false flag operation” that is important.
I was referring to Mr. Balko’s comment about “100 million” killed by communism, specifically. Some members of Occupy are commies, but as I said before, not all of them are. Balko was trying to make a point about police oppression of Occupy, but the point got sidetracked with his comment about May Day in general.
As to why May Day couldn’t have been “stolen”: I think that it’s important to remember that the labour leaders in the 19th and early 20th centuries were not the bureaucratic entities they are to today. Labour leaders risked death for their activities, and found it. And workers at that time generally did not think of themselves as “temporarily embarassed millionaires”; they
thought of themselves as workers.
He wasn’t talking about the Occupiers as commies, he was talking about the fact that May Day, whether we like it or not, is inextricably tied to communism in the minds of anyone who reached adulthood prior to 1989. That would be true whether the Occupiers considered themselves communists, conservatives, Catholics or Catharists. Furthermore, it doesn’t matter what the labor leaders “considered” themselves; Stella Marr and the other “survivors” who worship Melissa Farley consider themselves representative ex-prostitutes, but that doesn’t make them my anointed representative.
I will say this about Occupy, it was founded by anarchists. Now, lots of people hate anarchists as much as communists, but it is a different movement with different goals.
Not all Democrats are commies either, but it doesn’t make any difference: the extremists who lead the party write the bills, and the rest vote for them. Thus the moderates in the party do as much damage as the worst radicals.
And Maggie is right about unions: like governments, they are just gangsters with a good PR machine (and their claim to “represent” most people is BS).
So was Pol Pot. Matters not what he called himself he enjoined in mass murder to enrich himself. That makes him as bad as any “Leopold” out there.
Lenin was very clear that he desired “state capitalism”. In practice, that involves the entire population becoming the private property of the elite.
So is your opinion on economics and capitalism? It does seem a little more nuanced than the average libertarian I’ve encountered. Though admittedly that is because they are young males like myself and we have so much trouble with nuance.
Sadly, there are a lot of people who use “libertarianism” as an excuse for pure selfish greed without a whit of concern for individual rights, just as there are a lot of people who use “religion” as an excuse for hate or “doing a job” as an excuse for brutality. These are all excuses,not true philosophies. Real libertarians oppose any attempt by the powerful (whether empowered by money, arms or numbers) to impose on the few, whether that imposition is economic, sexual, legal or whatever.
Really? The Internet (which is never wrong) claims libertarianism is
“generally considered to be the group of political philosophies which emphasize freedom, liberty, and voluntary association. There is no general consensus among scholars on the precise definition. Libertarians generally advocate a society with a government of small scope relative to most present day societies or no government whatsoever.”
But even presuming that libertarianism were a unified philosophy without important dissent among its adherents, why couldn’t libertarians agree to put underage criminals in juvenile hall? That would be a clear case of the many, wealthy, fully grown individuals imposing their will on a few, poor youngsters. It’s also a clear case where every libertarian I’ve known would say that the delinquents have violated the rights of others and thus abandoned their own rights.
Really the entire issue of children causes problems for libertarianism. Clearly children are individuals, with their own feelings, thoughts, perspectives, and needs; equally clearly these needs must be met for humanity to continue as a species. Yet what would become of children if caregivers were not required to provide for them? What would become of society if they were not cared for by the many state rune organizations we have today?
I don’t ask these questions to imply that there must be some organization or law put in place to ensure the protection of children. But – and this is the real point – most people naturally do. If there were ever a large, modernized democracy which lacked extensive child protection systems, requiring mandatory schooling, vaccination, nutrition, and so on, such laws could not long remain off the books. This is why I tend to think democracy itself is incompatible with libertarianism; humans as a species are emotional, anxious, and threatened by nonconformity. In other words, the overwhelming majority of people are naturally authoritarians, and the rest of us must simply cope with that as best we can. C’est la vie!
The lack of a consensus definition does not invalidate a personal definition; if anything, it necessitates it. However, I don’t consider anything you mentioned to be a “special problem” for libertarianism, any more than for any other form of government; the world is not perfect and compromise is always necessary. But without a strong underlying philosophy of inviolable individual rights, descent into tyranny is inevitable.
Very well, but my Lady still leaves me with a sense that she believes most libertarians are somehow driven by pragmatism rather than philosophy when they advocate restricting the liberty of juvenile delinquents. Does My Lady *truly* believe that real libertarians oppose any attempt by the powerful to impose on the few?
Also, I can’t help but wonder how effective a strong underlying philosophy of inviolable individual rights are, given that 200 years of democracy has utterly undermined the libertarian paradise envisioned by the founding fathers. What does this say about democracy and human nature, if people so consistently vote themselves into tyranny?
I don’t see the conflict you’re referring to.
There are some “niche” branches of Libertarianism who advocate no government. So these Libertarians would be the only Libertarians who would have a problem with enforcing the will of the many on the few.
But for the vast majority of Libertarians …
The very fact that they believe in government at all should be proof enough to you that they recognize that there will be times when the will of the many has to be imposed on the few. That is one of the major reasons for the existence of government. In fact – it’s the FIRST reason for government. Libertarians run for office in all 50 states and I’ve yet to hear one who says … “Elect me so I can work to abolish my office!”
It just doesn’t happen too often.
The question is – to what extent may the “many” interfere with the “few”? How powerful should this government be? The position that many of us hold is that the “many” should interfere with the “few” only when it’s absolutely necessary. We have to have a safe, orderly society – so we have to give some power to the government to provide that – but there must be checks and balances on this – and this is where the devil is in the details.
I think it says more about human nature than it does Democracy. Informed people don’t go to the polls to vote themselves a tyranny. Ignorant people who can’t be bothered with learning about government – and who vote for any politician who promises them something are the problem. Ignorant people who see illegal aliens as the problem and vote for anti-immigration politicians are the problem. Ignorant people who think the rich are the causes of their woes are the problem.
Also – i wouldn’t call all of the Founders very strict libertarians.
We got a lot of stupid people out here. Now – at the end of the day – you may tell me that Democracy is incompatible with human nature – and that … well, I may one day agree with you on. 😛
I don’t see a conflict per se; rather I’m uncomfortable with My Lady’s claims that real libertarians oppose any attempt by the powerful to impose on the few. This sounds like an interesting flavor of leftism rather than libertarianism.
Regarding the rest of your comment, most of what you say is true. But as for democracy, I don’t think having an informed populace would avoid the end result of tyranny. Growing up, my parents were both very well informed on political issues; one was a classic tax and spend liberal, while the other was a Bible loving conservative. They, and millions of similar people, desire intrusive solutions to everyone’s problems. They don’t vote for authoritarian causes because they are uninformed, but because they are very well informed. They desire a world that is predictable and safe, and accept the costs which come with those desires. That is simply what human nature is.
Not at all; true libertarians are concerned with individual liberty, hence the name. Scan the archives over at Reason.com if you don’t believe me.
We almost certainly differ in this area, but I believe that more than libertarians are concerned with individual liberty.
From what I’ve seen true libertarianism isn’t that far from what everybody wants, the problem is that libertarianism is just more naive. Like, a libertarian society will inevitably reinvent everything we already have except for the things everybody agreed was a problem in the first place.
Libertarianism has been called “the Marxism of the Right.” I feel that it makes the same basic mistake Marxism did: just get rid of The Evil Thing and people’s better nature will take care of all the problems The Evil Thing was used to address.
With Marxists, The Evil Thing was capitalism, with its greed and exploitation. Just get rid of that yucky stuff and people will still work hard, still innovate, without any profit motive at all, just out of the goodness of their little commie hearts. Well, that didn’t work out so well.
With libertarians, The Evil Thing is government, with its taxation and use of force. Just get rid of that yucky stuff and the poor will still be fed, their children educated, their medical needs met, because people will just naturally give to charity and besides, they can all pull themselves up by their bootstraps, even if they don’t have boots. I expect this to turn out about as well.
You are both completely wrong, and really need to read the output of sites like Cato and Reason instead of making silly, overbroad pronouncements of what “libertarians” believe. Here’s a hint: I’m probably a bit more extremist in my position than most libertarians.
Again, I get my notions of “what is a libertarian” from people who self-identify as such. Now, this doesn’t mean that there can’t be libertarians, self-identifying ones, who are nothing like this, just as there are plenty of Christians who are nothing like Pat “we had 9/11 coming” Robertson.
Perhaps, like Christians, libertarians need to make it more clear just what is and is not the fringe of the whole thing. You also need to consider the possibility that YOU are the fringe. Reasonable people may be the minority. Maybe not, but you are the first self-identifying libertarian I’ve encountered who doesn’t fulfill just a whole lot of this. I’ve met lots of non-Robertsonian Christians.
Again, you need to read more of what libertarian INTELLECTUALS write, not selfish morons who use “libertarianism” as their excuse for evil behavior. One of the things about libertarians is that we don’t really believe in forcing our views on anyone, so you generally have to come to our spaces (like this blog or The Agitator) to encounter real libertarian thought. Also, libertarians prefer to present the truth and allow it to stand on its own merits, so you won’t find many trying to shout down pundits who profit from Big Nanny and the left-right fallacy.
So, libertarianism is something that must be sought out, rather than something that you are recruited to.
That seems like a very yin/feminine ideal, and I have been noticing a lot of parallels between libertarianism and that concept.
Well, when you think about it, proselytizing (the act of trying to convince others to come around to one’s own beliefs) isn’t very libertarian. So most prefer to put the philosophy out there as I do and then basically say, “this is what I believe, now you make your own decision.”
Yes, but which intellectual? Robert Nozick or Murray N. Rothbard? Divergent viewpoints if ever there were such.
“America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.”
–Abraham Lincoln
By the way, there’s a new rescuer in town:
http://radfemimages.wordpress.com/2012/05/17/ruhama/#more-1535
Ruhama’s not new; they’re the main drivers behind the campaign to impose the Swedish Model on Ireland. Spiritually, they’re in exactly the same tradition as the old Magdalene Laundries.
I just read something that warmed my heart and made me feel less like we’re in the DPRK: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/05/doj-supports-right-to-record/
Some of the backstory made my blood boil, but it is a step in the right direction.
My Lady is perhaps familiar with Joseph de Maistre? “Toute nation a le gouvernement qu’elle mérite.” He said “gouvernement” of course, but if his remarks are meaningful then I think they entail that every nation also gets the police force it deserves.
Indeed, reading My Lady’s blog I often wonder why she bothers. There are other nations in which to live, after all; why not move somewhere better, such as New Zealand? The climate can’t be too far different from her New Orleans, and prostitution laws are much more relaxed there. The poor people of North Korea have no choice, but Americans still retain the right to emigrate.
The simple answer is, I have far too many ties here to abandon them. So I’ve done the next best thing, namely to move far out into the country in a state where landowners have extremely strong rights against intrusion by anyone, including cops.
Ah! This I can understand. My Lady must cut quite the figure on her proud country estate, with the wind blowing through her sepia locks and pollen in her cleavage. I myself live in the States because I lack the financial means to escape them; someday however I hope to have a giant dome on a foreign planet where there is no pollen to give either myself or my wife asthma.
I don’t mind pollen in my cleavage; it’s the ticks and chiggers I can’t stand, in my cleavage or anywhere else. 🙁
Silly invertebrates and their not obtaining written permission first!
Hmm – yeah – reminds of me of this little “hitch hiker” that I carried from Tennessee once all the way back to Hawaii.
I’m not going to tell you where I found him – but he was a fat little feller when I did. Suffice it to say – he was plugged in nicely to a place where his head would have exploded due to backpressure if a hot chick had wandered into my view! 😛
And that’s a Hong Kong No Shitter. 😀
Once I’ve conquered Sweden – she’ll move there because I’m going to make her my Secretary of the Department of Harlotry. 😀
Good luck. Sweden is short of good secretaries.
Only if we can keep the European style, “minister”, instead. “Ministry of Harlotry” has such an awesome ring to it. 😀
Almost a religious ring, yes? I can see it now, dressed in black and white, with celluloid collar, ministering to harlots. Or being ministered by harlots. I think that that kind of ministry would be one worth supporting!
I volunteer to become Permanent Undersecretary to the Minister of Harlotry.
Then I can say “Yeeess Minister” just like Nigel Hawthorne in the UK TV Series.
Ah, beaureacracy. We rule the world, in truth. We have tenure. 😈
Whenever anyone speaks of ministries, I think of http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqhlQfXUk7w 🙂
I’m headed out to visit family in Oklahoma, and will not likely have much in the way of Internet access. I’ll look in when I get back.
“… there is nothing noble about “the workers”, any more than about any other human beings; ANY group which bullies, harms and violates the right of others is evil, whether that group is labelled a “government”, “the police”, “religion”, a “labor union”, a “corporation” or whatever other fancy title you can dream up. Oppression is oppression and tyranny is tyranny, and I am the implacable foe of any form of it over individuals or weaker groups no matter what their excuse.”
Well said.
Thank you! 🙂
May 1 is not a theft from the Communists, it is rather a theft by the Communists of what started in 1886 as an American workers’ day of solidarity, scheduled the same day as what was a traditional bank holiday, as well as a European day of celebration going back to Roman times. It also happened to be the day that President Lincoln’s body arrived in Chicago in 1865.
Nor should we ever forget the wars which were waged in the name of capitalist expansion. The Opium Wars in China (1839-42, 1856-58) killed 1-2 million Chinese and led to an estimated 90 million Chinese (out of a population of 400 million) addicted to opium. Like it or not, and I don’t, one of Mao’s great achievements was the end of the pernicious opium trade and its associated addiction in China.
The Indian Wars here in the United States were effectively an attempt at genocide. Approximately two million Native Americans lived in today’s contiguous 48 states in 1790. Fewer than one million were still alive when the Battle of Wounded Knee was fought a century later. All so we could seize their lands for its minerals, timber, and just plain exploitation of the land for farms and ranches.
Nor should we forget our nation’s abhorrent history of slavery. The Civil War was fought for economic reasons, of which slavery was the visible emblem. The slave supported agricultural system of the antebellum South followed a pattern that went back to the earliest conquering civilizations. The North had already proven itself so superior economically with its European-style factory based, capitalist system, that the South could only maintain its political and economic position because of the peculiarities in the U.S. Constitution: with only two Senators from every state, and non-voting slaves being counted as equal to three-fifths of a free man when considering population for apportionment of seats in the House of Representatives. The South, unwilling to relinquish its power, or change with the times to maintain it, felt that secession was the only answer. They were trod beneath the feet of history, the spiritual descendants not of Washington and Jefferson, but of the American Tories who opposed them.
We also should never forget Vietnam, where our bombs and artillery killed millions of Vietnamese civilians, North and South. Nor should we forget Iraq: Our war there under false pretenses killed more than 100,000 civilians, and left another million or so refugees.
Remember, the rise of organized labor closely parallels the rise of the middle class in the U.S. As organized labor membership has declined, so has the median income in this country in constant dollars, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Teddy Roosevelt was correct: because business organizes, so too must labor organize.
As I stated in the header for my May 10, 2012 OpEdNews article, “A Collective Sigh,” (http://www.opednews.com/articles/A-Collective-Sigh-by-Richard-Girard-120510-389.html), “The best system of government in the world is worthless without responsible individuals to run it. Responsible humans of goodwill can take a piece of crap system and make it better than it has any right to be. However, no government will simply allow those who will exploit their fellow humans to do so without fear of punishment. Martha Stout stated 1 in 25 of us are sociopaths; without government, they run things.”
Blaming labor for society’s woes is blaming the rape victim for the rape. My above stated article is my defense on the subject, if you care to read it.
The theft cascade is exactly what I was talking about in the column; labor stole May Day from paganism, communism stole it from labor, the US tried to steal it from commies, etc. And as I pointed out, the day wasn’t associated with British or American expansion, so their respective atrocities are immaterial. The fact of the matter is that the Occupy movement is trying to repurpose a day which has become tainted in the minds of many living people; that’s the point I was making. It doesn’t matter which form of tyranny has a higher body count, because the Occupiers aren’t trying to repurpose any holidays associated with other forms of tyranny, just communism.
I’m tempted to ask who gives half a damn who the first day in May is being “stolen” from, and why? In Hawaii it’s also Lei Day. I’ve also known it as Space Day, since I’m big on space.
If the idea that Occupy is repurposing a commie holiday bothers you, then just assume that they’re stealing it from Hawaii.
It doesn’t “bother” me; I merely pointed out that it’s spectacularly clueless. I honestly felt that was clear in the text, but methinks people are more interested in straining after gnats than considering the uncomfortable implications of this post.
That’s entirely possible. I’m still a little unclear on what these “uncomfortable implications” are. May first will cause the Occupiers to look like commies, even if they’re not? Not for most people. May first just doesn’t hold the prominence in the American mind of July Fourth or September Eleventh. Sure, if you’re a history buff you might immediately think of the Soviet Union, but if you’re a history buff there probably isn’t a date on the calendar which isn’t significant.
Thing is, I never associated that day with communism, loyalty, or really anything except the month of May, except for an occasional thought of maypoles, necklaces of Hawaiian flowers, and the thought that October 4th might be a better choice for Space Day. The communist connection was something I was vaguely aware of, if somebody else mentioned it, which almost never happened. And I’m more history buff than most, though of course not nearly as much as some.
How about this? IGNORE the damned introduction, and start reading at the first blockquote. I think that should make it clear enough.
I honestly don’t understand why such an intelligent crowd is busily straining after gnats while camels walk by.
The cops were acting like little men with God complexes. I got that. Of course, I say “acting like” as if they weren’t actually little men with God complexes, but methinks that oftentimes, they aren’t acting.
1) It was not stolen; it was used as a convenient day (Saturday May 1, 1886) for labor to gather throughout the U.S. to lobby for an 8-hour day. It was the excesses of the Pinkertons and the Chicago PD that turned it into Labor Day everywhere in the world except the United States.
2) Why shouldn’t Occupy repurpose the day, which has lost its original meaning throughout most of the world, and in the process educate the American people on the history of the labor movement in this country. Maybe we can at long last bury Marx’s “spectre of Communism,” and drive a stake through its heart.
AFAIAC – “Occupy” can have the day. It’s a day that’s associated with anti-Capitalism anyway and that’s what the occupy folks are. They’re anti-capitalists – at the end of the day – that’s what they are.
I’m am quite something “other”. My Dad was shot at regularly while crossing picket lines during each union strike at his plant – and they seemed to happen at the drop of a hat back in the 60’s. My Dad was management – but he wasn’t always management – he had been a dues paying member of the union for years before he was selected for management. After he was selected – the union didn’t give two shits for him and he was routinely fired upon while trying to do his damn job.
The unions can go and fuck themselves – that’s how much I care for them. In fact, it was that kind of violence from the unions that caused most of the Southern US states to pass “Right to Work” laws which have BROKEN union power in the South. I applaud this. In fact, no one in my government shop is a union member and when the union rep tries to come in to talk to us for recruiting purposes – we make fun of him and he storms out of the office.
Why does a union rep even have the right to interrupt my day when I’m working?
As far as Occupy goes – they can have any day they wish – still doesn’t change the fact that they are against EVERYTHING. I’m reminded of the Tom Snyder interview with the Sex Pistols back in the 70’s. Tom asked them why they were so angry and what about the world DID THEY LIKE???
One of them responded, maybe it was Johnny Rotten … by saying … “I don’t know what I like – i just know what I don’t like”.
Great – that’s intellectualism for you and it pretty much sums up the “occupy” creed.
Which shows you’ve only watch or read MSM on Occupy. The Main Stream Media has gone out of its way to present Occupy as Anarchists, which they are not. There are intelligent, thinking individuals who do not want to tear everything down and start over. They are simply concerned with the corporations having too much power, a view held by Jefferson, Madison, Jackson, Van Buren, Lincoln, Cleveland, both Roosevlets, and Eisenhower (what do you think the Military industrial complex was all about.)
As to the problems your dad had with unions thank Senator Taft and Congressman Hartley for that. Go read my article “The Daft-Heartless Act” on OpEdNews to find out how unlike Europe, supervisory personnel are excluded from unions.
You’re absolutely kidding right? The biggest ally the occupy folks have is the MSM – I can tell you that if the Tea Party had been as ill equipped with it’s arguments it would not have lasted three days let alone three years – and with the MSM and the entire Democratic party sniping them every moment of the way!
I’ve seen the interviews of the kids of “occupy” crowds. I’ve seen the pictures of the trash heaps – the dirty people and I’ve heard the smell described. I have heard the stories of the victims of “rape” within these crowds. I’ve seen photos and videos of the occupy crowds defecating on police cars, private, cars, and private and public property. None of this is made up – it happened.
How many people have they arrested so far?
How many Tea Party were arrested? How many raped? How much trash left behind at those demonstrations?
What I can’t stand – is how occupy people seem to think the world belongs to them … “Hey, let’s just occupy this public park until the police throw us out?” Who cares about the kids who like to play here – IT’S OURS NOW!”
Sorry – but they aren’t going to get anywhere with that attitude. Which is one reason I hope they keep it up.
They’re a failed movement already – they haven’t impacted a single point of change.
My point exactly. MSM shows the bad, ignores the good. Speaking of the Tea Party, if 10,000 Occupy people had marched with assault rifles from northern Virginia to DC like the Tea Party did in 2010, with signs saying down with the President, how long would they have lasted? There is a double standard, because Occupy is not supported by billionaires and the Tea Party is.
Please provide us with a link that describes how the Tea Party smuggled 10,000 assault rifles into Washington, DC – the most anti-gun city in the nation.
Also – which rally was this – I actually was a part of one of them.
Yes – I was a TP guy in the beginning and a lot of Libertarians were. However, most of us left when they started associating themselves with social issues.
I said to DC, not into DC, nor did I say smuggle. Please do not put words in my mouth in a flagrant attempt to discredit me. I think Maggie may be right.
Never mind. Frankly, I’m very close to removing that whole section from the essay so people stop obsessing over a glorified introductory gimmick and talk about the ACTUAL POINT OF THE ESSAY instead. This reminds of me of the crowd at Feministe obsessing over the “Eskimo words for snow” thing.