Corporate
Collaborators
Standing with “the 99%” means supporting the destruction of civilized society.
by Mark Steyn
Way
back in 1968, after the riots at the Democratic Convention in Chicago, Mayor
Daley declared that his forces were there to “preserve disorder.” I believe
that was one of Hizzoner’s famous malapropisms. Forty-three years later Jean
Quan, mayor of Oakland, and the Oakland city council have made “preserving
disorder” the official municipal policy. On Wednesday, the “Occupy Oakland”
occupiers rampaged through the city, shutting down the nation’s fifth-busiest
port, forcing stores to close, terrorizing those residents foolish enough to
commit the reactionary crime of “shopping,” destroying ATMs, spraying the
Christ the Light Cathedral with the insightful observation “F**k,” etc. And how
did the Oakland city council react? The following day they considered a
resolution to express their support for “Occupy Oakland” and to call on the
city administration to “collaborate with protesters.”
That’s
“collaborate” in the Nazi-occupied-France sense: The city’s feckless political
class are collaborating with anarchists against the taxpayers who maintain them
in their sinecures. They’re not the only ones. When the rumor spread that the
Whole Foods store, of all unlikely corporate villains, had threatened to fire
employees who participated in the protest, the regional president, David
Lannon, took to Facebook: “We totally support our Team Members participating in
the General Strike today — rumors are false!” But, despite his “total support,”
they trashed his store anyway, breaking windows and spraypainting walls. As the
Oakland Tribune reported:
A man who witnessed the Whole Foods attack, but asked not to be identified, said he was in the store buying an organic orange when the crowd arrived.
There’s
an epitaph for the republic if ever I heard one.
The
experience was surreal, the man said. “They were wearing masks. There was this
whole mess of people, and no police here. That was weird.”
No,
it wasn’t. It was municipal policy. In fairness to the miserable David Lannon,
Whole Foods was in damage-control mode. Men’s Wearhouse in Oakland had no such
excuse. In solidarity with the masses, they printed up a huge poster declaring
“We stand with the 99%” and announcing they’d be closed that day. In return,
they got their windows smashed.
I’m
a proud member of the 1 percent, and I’d have been tempted to smash ’em myself.
A few weeks back, finding myself suddenly without luggage, I shopped at a Men’s
Wearhouse, faute de mieux, in Burlington, Vt. Never again. I’m not interested
in patronizing craven corporations so decadent and self-indulgent that as a
matter of corporate policy they support the destruction of civilized society.
Did George Zimmer, founder of Men’s Wearhouse and backer of Howard Dean,
marijuana decriminalization, and many other fashionable causes, ever glance at
the photos of the OWS occupiers and ponder how many of “the 99%” were ever
likely to be in need of his two-for-one deal on suits and neckties? And did he
think even these dummies were dumb enough to fall for such a feebly corporatist
attempt at appeasing the mob?
I
don’t “stand with the 99%,” and certainly not downwind of them. But I’m all for
their “occupation” continuing on its merry way. It usefully clarifies the
stakes. At first glance, an alliance of anarchists and government might appear
to be somewhat paradoxical. But the formal convergence in Oakland makes
explicit the movement’s aims: They’re anarchists for statism, wild
free-spirited youth demanding more and more total government control of every
aspect of life — just so long as it respects the fundamental human right to
sloth. What’s happening in Oakland is a logical exercise in class solidarity:
The government class enthusiastically backing the breakdown of civil order is
making common cause with the leisured varsity class, the thuggish union class,
and the criminal class in order to stick it to what’s left of the beleaguered
productive class. It’s a grand alliance of all those societal interests that
wish to enjoy in perpetuity a lifestyle they are not willing to earn. Only the
criminal class is reasonably upfront about this. The rest — the lifetime
legislators, the unions defending lavish and unsustainable benefits, the
“scholars” whiling away a somnolent half decade at Complacency U — are obliged
to dress it up a little with some hooey about “social justice” and whatnot.
But
that’s all it takes to get the media and modish if insecure corporate entities
to string along. Whole Foods can probably pull it off. So can Ben &
Jerry’s, the wholly owned subsidiary of the Anglo-Dutch corporation Unilever
that nevertheless successfully passes itself off as some sort of tie-dyed
Vermont hippie commune. But a chain of stores that sells shirts, ties, the garb
of the corporate lackey has a tougher sell. The class that gets up in the
morning, pulls on its lousy Men’s Wearhouse get-up, and trudges off to work has
to pay for all the other classes, and the strain is beginning to tell.
Let
it be said that the “occupiers” are right on the banks: They shouldn’t have
been bailed out. America has one of the most dysfunctional banking systems in
the civilized world, and most of its allegedly indispensable institutions
should have been allowed to fail. But the Occupy Oakland types have no serious
response, other than the overthrow of capitalism and its replacement by
government-funded inertia.
America
is seizing up before our eyes: The decrepit airports, the underwater property
market, the education racket, the hyper-regulated business environment. Yet
curiously the best example of this sclerosis is the alleged “revolutionary”
movement itself. It’s the voice of youth, yet everything about it is cobwebbed.
It’s more like an open-mike karaoke night of a revolution than the real thing.
I don’t mean just the placards with the same old portable quotes by Lenin et
al., but also, say, the photograph in Forbes of Rachel, a 20-year-old
“unemployed cosmetologist” with remarkably uncosmetological complexion, dressed
in pink hair and nose ring as if it’s London, 1977, and she’s killing time at
Camden Lock before the Pistols gig. Except that that’s three and a half decades
ago, so it would be like the Sex Pistols dressing like the Andrews Sisters. Are
America’s revolting youth so totally pathetically moribund they can’t even
invent their own hideous fashion statements? Last weekend, the nonagenarian
Commie Pete Seeger was wheeled out at Zuccotti Park to serenade the oppressed
masses with “If I Had a Hammer.” As it happens, I do have a hammer. Pace Mr.
Seeger, they’re not that difficult to acquire, even in a recession. But, if I
took it to Zuccotti Park, I doubt very much anyone would know how to use it, or
be able to muster the energy to do so.
At
heart, Oakland’s occupiers and worthless political class want more of the same
fix that has made America the Brokest Nation in History: They expect to live as
beneficiaries of a prosperous Western society without making any contribution
to the productivity necessary to sustain it. This is the “idealism” that the
media are happy to sentimentalize, and that enough poseurs among the corporate
executives are happy to indulge — at least until the window-smashing starts. To
“occupy” Oakland or anywhere else, you have to have something to put in there.
Yet the most striking feature of OWS is its hollowness. And in a strange way
the emptiness of its threats may be a more telling indictment of a fin de civilisation
West than a more coherent protest movement could ever have mounted.
No comments:
Post a Comment