On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Kevin M. <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 12:40 PM, Mark J. <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Unfortunately, the comments (which I know aren't RT's fault) come > > right out of the lunatic fringe (a anti-Semitic rant about the > > Rothschilds controlling everything and another commenter calling > > President Obama "a gangster from Chicago"--which sounds more like > > Lonesome Rhodes Beck than the left--and saying he should be tried as a > > war criminal) and are the sort of crap that does the Occupy Wall > > Street cause no good, unless these people really want anarchy or > > Soviet-style Communism instead of proper government regulation of > > businesses like we had before the Reagan era. > > Agreed. I suppose one of the distinct things about this protest is > that, because it is so wide in scope, it attracts people from all > parts of the ideological spectrum. Occupy will get everyone from > communists to tea partiers, because it isn't a protest about any > single issue. Watch any of the live feeds during their general > assemblies and you'll hear a mix of people making motions. Some of > them are simple (I heard someone debate what to say as they're being > hauled away in plastic cuffs) to the far left (I heard someone make a > motion to suspend the wearing of clothing) to the far right (I heard > someone want to issue a statement to Congress telling them they have > no authority under the Constitution). The thing is, in a > representative democracy, the fringe folks are heard and -- frankly -- > can sit on the literal fringes to do as they please. At the Occupy LA > march I attended, there were two or three "9/11 truthers" out there, > and their views were given the exact right amount of recognition, > which was very little. Contrast that with media who have decided that > all views carry equal weight no matter how far out they are. > I think this is something of a special movement, but I would not say it is unique in the sense of the diversity of interests represented. I have been to many (many) liberal and left-wing protests and marches and community organizing meetings over the years - invariably there is the same eclectic mix of characters - the pro hemp legalize MJ guys; the pro-Palestinian anti-zionist anti-semites; the pro-Israel, anti Arab terrorist Jews; the Eco-terrorist tree-spikers; the first-peoples advocates, the bring-home-our MIA/POW PTSD-ing vets, the hairy lesbians, the flamboyant gays, the guys selling subscriptions to the Daily Worker, the old gals from the ILG, the radical nuns and married or gay priests, and, in more recent years, the truthers, and the "forgive student loans" late 20-somethings. Sometimes this motley crew makes up the bulk of the crowd at lefty gatherings, often the bulk of the crowd is composed of students and young parents with their children and graying liberals who never saw a rally they didn't like - though, as Kevin notes, in these cases almost always the media ignores the boring majority and focuses on the freak show. If you are a lefty who digs the protest scene, you don't begrudge the freaks - their existence is part of what validates your values - but the distorted perspective provided by the media is irritating. But this movement is a bit different - more populist (which probably accounts for the occasional Tea Party-sounding rant) and less doctrinaire in terms of party politics or orthodox liberal ideology than I have typically seen. -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en
