Ideas have consequences. That’s a famous maxim of conservative theorist Richard Weaver, a thinker who was big when I was little. He was right. Ideas do have consequences, and different ideas have distinct consequences.
One can sometimes judge ideas by the consequences of trying to articulate them and put them into practice.
A few weeks ago one of the more seemingly absurd statements about the Occupy movement, the “99 percenters,” went viral. Doug “Media Virus” Rushkoff argued that the movement should not be counted as “a protest, but a prototype for a new way of living.” He said that the prototypers (can’t call them “protestors,” now, can I?) “are actually forging a robust micro-society of working groups, each one developing new approaches — or reviving old approaches — to long running problems.”
Read his argument for yourself. To me, it seems a bit too much in the old Charles Reich/Theodore Roszak school of counterculture-pushing.
Worse yet, Rushkoff’s explanation doesn’t fit well with the facts on the ground. The movement has gotten increasingly ugly and violent, as has been widely reported, but which the folks at Reason.com handily synopsize … giving Shikha Dalmia an excuse to conjure up the Hobbesian specter of the life of man in a state of nature: nasty, brutish, and short.
And yet, evidence suggests that people do co-operate without oversight, at least during emergencies, pretty well.
But not, I think, if their ideas scream out for special treatment and subsidy and against others’ success.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
4 replies on “Occupy the State of Nature”
Mr. Rushkof waxes nostalgic and lauds over the commune culture as though it were something new, yet no hint in his post about his dropping everything to run out and join it. Lip service.
And I’m guessing that he is too young to have joined the movement back in the 60s and feels like he missed out.
The Occupiers see a problem but lack a solution. I see exactly what they are saying. And I agree. Yet I do not have a solution either.
As for the escalation of the Occupation, what else can happen. For all the publicity, these people are basically being ignored. In human nature the ignored keep getting louder and louder, like a kid who wants something.
The problem is what is the solution? As the “suit” once said, “I have the right to make a profit”. So they moved the jobs over seas to make more of a profit.
You see. I do not begrudge anyone making a profit in business.
There has been reckless disregard for the well being of those who have lost their jobs. All because the rich are not making ‘enough’ profit.
So how do we balance making a profit and keeping people working? How much is enough profit?
The mantra is: all I want is more than I ever had before.
Think back to the 80’s. Corporate raiding was the best way to make fast big money. The “suits” made big money and the workers lost their jobs. This trend has not stopped. The latest big move was for industry to move over seas. Again, american’s lost their jobs.
Those who oppose the Occupation ignore the obvious. If we do not bring jobs back to the U.S. no one will have money to buy anything and because people are not working they will not be paying taxes. Therefore we will all lose.
The National Debt will just keep growing, middle class america will keep fading, until all has faded away.
Seriously. We need a change.
Is anyone listening?
[…] Occupy the State of Nature https://thisiscommonsense.org////?p=6793 […]
[…] New Investment Website Offers Novel Strategy for ‘Occupying’ Wall Street: Share Trends and Take Back Investment Decision Power Occupy Wall Street “End to End for 99%” March today | Harlem TrendsOCCUPY – The new biggie of the capitalist system | Earth Global ReviewThe 99% Spur Fashion Trends, Capitalized On by the 1% How China’s State-Owned Banks Make Huge Profits in a Slow Economy | Set You Free NewsCommon Sense with Paul Jacob […]