Occupy....

The Occupy Wall Street movement has spurred some interesting sister movements around the country.  Note that all of the other occupy movements name the city, not a specific street.  For example, there is Occupy Boston, shouldn't that be Occupy Beacon Street or Occupy Milk Street?  There's Occupy Philadelphia, shouldn't that be Occupy Market Street?

The protestors of Occupy Wall Street have emphasized that this is a leaderless movement and it's by the people, for the people.  But it also shows that New York City is a very different city than any other city in the world.  People in Philadelphia, San Francisco and Boston seem to be angry at the city whereas, the people involved with Occupy Wall Street seem to be angry at policy makers in Washington DC and bankers who worked on Wall Street.  There is a basic financial and economic injustice that just bothers them.  Their anger may be misdirected at the bankers, but it's palpable. 

Another hallmark of this movement is that if you place a city behind Occupy, you will have a protest.  This morning I saw someone with an "Occupy Detroit" logo on their bag.  If I have ever agreed with any of the protests, it is with Occupy Detroit, because that is a very good idea.  With people leaving Detroit, the best thing that can happen to that city is for it to be occupied.  It's a good thing that  their baseball and football teams are doing well, but they certainly do need more people in that city to spur some economic development, so yes, please, everyone OCCUPY DETROIT!!!!!!

I need to find a place where...

Since protesters started to occupy Zucotti Park (aka Liberty Plaza), open spaces managed by private companies have started to be more wary of how these spaces can be used.  Recently, the managers of the open space in front of World Trade Center 7 posted some rules on park usage. 

Most of these rules make sense to retain the "quality of life" in the open space.  Prohibiting littering, stunts off the benches and noise seem to make sense.  No one wants to sit in a dirty, noisy park and run the risk of being slammed by a skateboarder or a stunt bicyclist.

The one rule that seems to be a bit strange is the prohibition of "using illegal drugs or alcohol".   First, publicly drinking alcohol from an open container is against the law in NYC.  Aside, from food service establishments with sidewalk tables, it makes sense to prohibit the use of alcoholic beverages in this public space.  Why would the use of illegal drugs be prohibited in THIS park?  Is there a park in NYC where the use of illegal drugs is allowed?  I cannot think of any.  If anyone knows of any park in NYC where the use of illegal drugs is NOT prohibited, please let me know.

I think that listing rules on park usage is a good idea, because some areas of the law are not clear.  I think littering is pretty clear, but it's re-emphasized her in these rules.  This park does have a fountain where kids like to run into during the summer months, so that rule makes sense.  Soliciting / panhandling is a quality of life issue and should be spelled out in this case.  Some things are just clearly against the law, like the use of ILLEGAL drugs.  Would a person who sits in a park and smokes marrjuna be surprised to be approached by law enforcement officers?  What would he say?  "I didn't know that smoking ILLEGAL drugs was prohibited in this park.  If I had known that this kind of behavior was frowned upon... "

Clearly, this is not over-legislation or over-regulation.  I do not know if there is even a word (or set of words) that would describe this case.  Maybe "overly cautious" comes to mind.

We are the World (Really, we are)

Towards the evening after the "eviction" (aka the enforcement of the rule of law) of those who had occupied Zucotti Park, I found one of the protesters standing near the park with a piece of cardboard that read:
     MURBARAK
     KHADAFY
     BLOOMBERG
You are next for violating the rights of free speech.

Or something like that, but the main point was the two recent world leaders in juxtaposition to the mayor of New York City.
It's a good thing that the Mr. Bloomberg has thick skin, because no one wants to be compared to two recent world leaders who were violently removed from office.  I'm surprised the protestor did not list Idi Amin and Pol Pot as well, but maybe it was the lack of space on the back of the pizza box that kept the number to two world leaders. 

If the mayor did feel insulted by these comparisons, I would encourage him to look at the brighter side of things.  It is nice that New York City can be compared to two COUNTRIES in the world and that the mayor of New York has that status of a world leader.  If we extend the comparison, this would make commissioner Ray Kelly the Minister of Defense.  The police force would be the army.  City Hall would be Tripoli or Cairo.  Gracie Mansion would be the palace and Bloomberg's Fifth Avenue home would be the winter palace or the summer retreat.  Maybe I have carried this a bit too far, but it's Occupy Wall Street, there are no limits to the hyperbole when bankers, politicians and businessmen are compared to ruthless dictators who wantonly run tanks over their own people, commit genocide or eat their opposition. 

With all of the so called college educated protestors (especially the ones that majored in any type of history) could they be more creative than comparing people to Mr. Murbark, Mr. Khadafy, or Adolf Hitler.  Why can't they find some obscure figures like Idi Amin, Pol Pot, King John of England, or even Mr. Montgomery Burns of Springfield?  Is it because the protesters are not as educated as they seem.  If that is the case,then they should blame the universities or other schools that they have attended for failing in their tasks to give them a proper education.  It is those institutions that have failed them.  Those Ivory Towers that are too big to fail.

Yes, Occupy Wall Street, the world is watching, so be a bit more creative in making signs and stop making the USA look like a bunch idiots to the rest of the world with completely inappropriate comparisons of world leaders to the mayor of New York City. 

On Cults

Mind control.  Yes, now you're thinking "Kevin has really gone off the deep end and will never come back."  Perhaps you are right, but just consider this for a moment.  Why do people say that religion and cults are for the weak-minded?  That is because for the most part it may be true.  Any type of organization that preys on people who are lonely (away from home), isolated (away from home), starving (away from home) and extremely tired (lack of sleep). 

Most people who are socially secure, not in want and generally well rested make rational decisions.  They don't have to be told what to wear, when to eat or what to think.  This is why child-rearing is so important.  When you take away that kind of support from a person, they tend to make really bad decisions about a lot of things and when they are extremely tired, they begin to give in mentally and just go with whatever is there so that they can survive.  That is very much like a drug addict who will do anything for the next fix.  In this case the next fix is to be included in the immediate community.

If you study why cults are so successful, it is because they isolate people, break down their self-esteem and then tire them out by depriving them of sleep.  Then they have the inductees recite mantras until they take root and in a few weeks, you have a bonafide cult member.  So how is this similar to the occupy wall street movement, college and torture. 

In the OWS movement, you have people who are living in a park that is not designed for living.  They spend practically 24 hours a day together, listening to the misguided drivel that comes out of anyone's mouth.  Although they have food, they have to stand for hours on end or sit on hard surfaces and then hear more of the "money is evil" mantra.  They are quite isolated.  You may argue that they get a lot of support, but that support doesn't come in socializing with different people, it comes from being together with people of the same mindset (like that of a cult).  So, here you have relatively young people who have been indoctrinated in the public eye and no one says a thing.  Why?  Because it's acceptable. 

How is college the same?  Again, you have similar conditions except with younger people who are looking for acceptance, away from home and sleep-deprived.  The universities are filled with teachers with a very liberal bias, and so, they are also indoctrinated in whatever their god-like professor tells them.  Again, the indoctrination of young people in the public eye..and it's PAID FOR.  Why?  Because it's acceptable.

Torture.  Everyone will agree that torture is bad.  Prisoners of War are in this same set of circumstances, although more extreme.  They are often pressured to give up information or even to say bad things about their own country.  We're not even talking about waterboarding or having them experience extreme pain.  Just simply depriving them of sleep, isolating them and starving them and they will say whatever they are told to say.

So, these so-called movements are nothing more than the indoctrination of young people who cannot think for themselves.  They present themselves as educated and intelligent people, but when you dig down, they just repeat the mantras that they have been imbued with.  Isn't it sad?