Sunday, October 23, 2011

Co-opting the Populist Majorities

I have stated before that I am happy to see the "Occupy Wall Street" movement moving forward and turning into something bigger. I am happy to see it gain momentum and migrate to other areas. The American people, like people all over the world, are angry with the ruling classes and are voicing their discontent. Whether the oligarchs have planned and/or financed the populist movements that have popped up lately I don't know, but it seems to me that it would be prudent for them to try to infiltrate such movements and obtain leadership positions so that they can steer them in directions they want them to go.

As with the tea party movement that was co-opted by the right, or the Republicans, so the left, or the Democrats, is co-opting the Occupy Wall Street movement, or at least trying to. Like the Tea Party movement, the Occupy Wall Street movement seems to be a decentralized grass roots effort without leadership or direction, just a protest meant to show the establishment the anger felt by the common folk. The people have shown that they know the system is broken and they want it fixed, but there are many divergent views as to exactly what about the system is broken and how to fix it. As often happens, there are many who attempt to take leadership upon themselves and instill their own vision of what should be and how to achieve that vision into the movement.

It seems to me that people have a tendency to do as little work as possible. Unfortunately, this also appears to be true when it comes to thinking. There are, however, those who are willing to do the thinking for everyone so long as they believe they'll gain something from it. I believe it is therefore important to expose as many people who are taking part in these protests to as many perspectives and ideas as possible. I believe it is important for all individuals to think for themselves and internalize as much information as possible to form their opinions.

It seems to me that many people taking part in these movements self identify with certain groups that may have gripes with other groups. This makes it easier for the establishment to use the strategy of divide and conquer to destabilize popular movements. A good example of this is business owners versus employees. Just because one owns a business doesn't make one rich or successful. Even those who are well off, very successful and look extremely wealthy, whether incorporated or not, can't really be compared to the huge, international corporations that have formed the backbone of the establishment. Yet there are those who would believe such successful businessmen are part of the elite ruling class. It seems to me that the differences and lack of understanding between these two groups can make it difficult for one to empathize with the other.

The problems that have become prevalent in this nation today aren't about left or right, Democrat or Republican, or conservative or liberal. The differences in these philosophies are miniscule for the most part. The problems are about liberty or tyranny. When government harasses, intimidates and jails the populace, that is tyranny. When people are able to peacefully go about their lives and their business without fear of official government intrusion and retribution, that is liberty. I believe that most people, despite what they might say about wanting freebees, simply wish to be left alone and would be happy to live in an economic environment that provided opportunity. I believe that most people, though they may not know it, would be pleased with free market solutions that would hold businesses accountable for their mistakes and create a competitive environment that rewarded and invited hard work and innovation.

This is not what we have in our nation today. What we have in a way is unique, and yet it has been tried in various iterations throughout history. It is the unholy marriage of big government, the huge established international corporations, and the central banking cartel pulling the strings. It can be called fascism, corporatism, an oligarchy, a plutocracy, etc., but there hasn't been a free market in this nation for a long, long time, if indeed there ever was a true free market. It is, in my humble opinion, the insistence on looking to the federal government to help regulate the marketplace that has enabled it to become the leviathan it is today and given it its ability to create market monopolies that could not otherwise exist.

I have found that there are a number of things that point to evidence that a given person or organization is trying to co-opt a movement and implant an agenda into it, especially if they are claiming a leadership or financial role to officially represent the diversified people involved in the movement. The first is a claim that more taxes are necessary. More taxes amount to more government. It is tantamount to asking the already over bloated federal government to grow even larger. Higher taxes on the rich is just a wealth redistribution scheme and could even send them fleeing from the country, taking jobs with them. Less spending is what is needed. Stopping hostilities in occupied nations and bringing troops home would be a good start and would save trillions. Whatever happened to the anti war movement anyway and why isn't it being cranked back up at these new Occupy Wall Street protests? I thought the left was supposed to despise war.

Another thing I'm leery of are efforts to insist on intervention and oversight from world organizations. America can take care of itself and its own problems. We do not need oversight from world organizations. We do not need a one world government. One world government would not be a touchy, feely, loving thing. It would involve more centralization, grander corruption and more money wasted on unnecessary bureaucracies that chew up and spit out little guys while letting the huge corporate interests get away with murder. It would mean more wealth, privilege, autonomy and immunity for the already super wealthy elite and more unjust restriction for the common folk while their rights are disrespected and eroded away. What is really needed is decentralization and more emphasis on local structures where problems are better understood, they can better be held accountable and individual rights are more likely to be taken into account.

Another thing to watch out for are people agitating for violence. I am quite happy to see Occupy Wall Street remaining a peaceful vigil as that movement had the capacity to blow up early on. People need to be aware of agent provocateurs in their midst. I understand that it is easy to get frustrated at the seeming lack of progress when it comes to changing the economic conditions. No one in power seems to be listening to the common folk, but they have been hearing the clamor coming from the street recently. Remember this, it is not the politicians that are changing things, it is the protesting and the threat of civil disobedience that is having the greatest effect. Violence never solved anything.

The other thing that bothers me is the entitlement mentality. I cringe when I hear someone asking to be given something for nothing. It seems that too many don't realize that in order to get something from the government, it had to be taken from someone else by force of taxation. Taxation is neither voluntary nor free from coercion as the powers that be would have you believe. People don't seem to realize that in order to get some form of service for free the people who provide that service have to become slavish. There is no such thing as a free lunch. Someone paid for it. In the current system we have, in order to benefit some, economic harm has to be done to others.

I understand that billions were given to the elite uber rich in the form of bailouts, and I understand the "I want mine" attitude, but two wrongs don't make a right. Personally, I think we'd have been better off if the lower classes had been bailed out rather than the elite banking cartel. This action has helped the super rich in a couple of ways. It has given them the liquidity they needed to cover up their criminal dealings while providing them with a way to pit the upper middle class taxpayers against the poor welfare class. The problem the ruling class might be having now is that I believe a lot more people have figured this out than they might have counted on.

Finally, I'd be wary of Republican and Democrat politicians jumping in front of the parade and wanting to pass new laws. With a few exceptions, politicians are mostly part of the problem and I don't believe they're going to be part of the answer, certainly not the batch of establishment globalist cronies we have in there now. We need laws repealed, not further restrictions imposed, in order to give entrepreneurs freer reign and grease the gears of economic growth. Perhaps if during the next couple of election cycles we can replace the current incumbents with more liberty oriented, smaller government folks things will be different. Until such a time, I think it is safe to assume that most politicians jumping on the bandwagon to make grand speeches to these movements are doing so for their own benefit, to get elected and to promote their corporate big government agendas.

If there's one thing the ruling class can't have, it's successful populist movements. They will try their best to co-opt such movements and make them irrelevant. It is therefore helpful to identify issues agreed upon by different movements and join together where possible. One such issue is the Federal Reserve. Both the Tea Party and the Occupy Wall Street crowds have identified this monolithic organization as a main source of our current economic troubles. Auditing, investigating, changing and even eliminating this failed institution should continue to be a mantra coming from all sides. Those who have participated in or enabled fraudulent and unethical behavior in the banking industry should be held accountable for their criminal activities and should be forced to make things right even if they have to lose their own massive fortunes doing so.

The other thing I believe most people would agree with is that business and personal relationships should be voluntary in nature. We need to recognize that government as it is run today is far from voluntary. It has been said many times that government is a monopoly on the use of force. Even Barrack Obama has said so. This force either prevents people from engaging in activities they want to engage in or makes them engage in behavior they don't want to engage in. The problem is that thousands, perhaps millions, of laws have been written that prevent people from engaging in behaviors that may be beneficial to them or that force them to engage in behaviors that may be harmful to them. In short, governments in general and the federal government in particular have overstepped their bounds far too often and the common folk are finally showing their displeasure.

It is my hope that populist movements don't succumb to establishment co-opting. I think it is important to keep putting out the message of freedom into these movements. I hope that more people are coming to understand this message and how important it is to become the free society that was the dream of some of the founders of this nation. Should the principles of freedom and liberty once again take hold in this nation and come to flourish and bloom, I think we will see such prosperity as is difficult to imagine.

My archived articles are available at szandorblestman.com. Please visit there and make a donation to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.

No comments: