Occupy Wall Street protestors in Boston complained that homeless people had taken coats, blankets and food donated to the fight against income inequality. “They don't bring anything to the table,” said a spokesman at the information tent. “It gets really frustrating.”
The Boston Herald
As we approached the Edmund Pettus Bridge we all knew we were on the verge of making history. We'd walked fifty miles from Selma along the Jefferson Davis Highway in the hot sun, risking beatings and shootings. Now, leaders of the movement huddled together as we planned what we would do if state troopers stopped us from crossing over to the other side on our way to Montgomery, the state capital.
It was decided that we would obey the federal court order and, if we met with resistance, we'd hold a short prayer session and simply turn around, consistent with our policy of peaceful and non-violent protest.
“Everybody ready?” Dr. King asked and, after murmurs of assent were heard all around, we began to line up in formation for our final and fateful meeting with destiny.
“Wait a minute,” one of the white marchers asked. “Shouldn't the blacks go to the back?”
I surveyed the luminaries who had assembled at Carnegie Hall for the Rally to Stop the Spread of Nuclear Weapons and felt as if I had stumbled upon a Disarmament All-Star Game. There was Dr. Linus Pauling, Dr. Albert Schweitzer, Lewis Mumford, W.E.B. DuBois—what a peacenik Dream Team!
But then I spotted him—Bertrand Russell. God, how that guy frosts my ass. Ever since he called my seminal work Prefatory Remarks Towards a Prolegomena to Any Future Study of the Philosophy of Philosophy a “jejune and meretricious farrago composed of equal parts nonsense, self-contradiction, okra and cumin,” I'd had it in for the guy.
“Hey Russell,” I shouted, as I started to take off my jacket. “You want a piece of me?”
The man who had gone to prison for his pacifism during World War I turned and, after recognizing me, sneered.
“You're threatening me? A Nobel Prize winner?” he asked with an uplifted eyebrow of scorn. “I could kick your sorry butt clear into next week, punk.”
“You feel froggy, just leap,” I snarled. “Ain't no fence around my ass.”
We squared off and the assembled pacifists drew back, creating an impromptu ring in which we could go at it. Up went the playground chant familiar to every schoolboy: “Fight, fight, fight, fight!”
It was a cold and rainy day that had been chosen for the vote on the Equal Rights Amendment, but I wasn't going to let that stop me. I was going to man—sorry, person—the polls with my hand-made cardboard “Equal Rights for Women Now!” sign from the moment they opened until they closed—that's how dedicated I was to the cause of ending sexism forever.
As I took my position outside the Susan B. Anthony Middle School and peeled back the plastic lid on my cup of coffee I spotted her; a brunette, well-turned ankles, in a stylish trench coat. I was transfixed by her big brown eyes and—I'm not above self-criticism—her gorgeous figure.
She gave me a smile as she approached and it was all I could do to gulp out an Alan Alda-like non-threatening “Hi.”
“Do you mind if I stand with you?” she asked in a voice that recalled the purring of a particularly contented tabby cat.
“Not at all beautiful,” I said. “Is it just me, or are you hot all of a sudden?”
I think this is a more contextually correct extract from the story in the Boston Herald. It's archived now and you have to buy it for $3.95, but I found a partial copy elsewhere:
---Demonstrator Andrew Warner, 36, said homeless people are hijacking tents, getting drunk, “passing out” and stealing.
“It’s turning into us against them,” Warner said. “They come in here and they’re looking at it as a way of getting a free meal and a place to crash, which is totally fine, but they don’t bring anything to the table at all. It gets really frustrating.”
Jackson Bush, manning the Occupy information tent yesterday, said some homeless people have been hoarding free items, including donated coats.
“We do have homeless people and people addicted to drugs who need to steal things,” Bush said. “They’re getting more than they need and trading it off. What we noticed is all the new jackets are disappearing quickly.”---
James--
I'm aware of what the full article says--I have the original. I write a monthly column for the Herald, and walk by the site every day.
People tend to come away from the site with images colored by their political point of view. Liberals see it as a mini-Woodstock, conservatives see it as the breakdown of civilization, a bunch of unemployable hippies camping out and acting out, etc.
I take a content-neutral point of view, as I did in my most recent column. They're doing some things right there (it's been an orderly site until recently) but they're doing some things very wrong; not reporting crimes against women, threatening reporters who try to come on the site (even ones from liberal media outlets), harboring people who have broken into small businesses nearby--three times, with violence, at last count.
There have been a disproportionate number of arrests for sales of heroin at the site--I particularly cherish the story about a man and women selling smack from their tent, in which their 6 year-old was living. Not a way to win hearts and minds to your cause.
I'm writing satire about the hypocrisy of turning away the homeless at a time when you claim to speak for the poor. Homeless shelters in the South End are complaining that OWS'ers are consuming resources they need to devote to their clientele who will be their long after OWS is gone--that is, those people who live on the streets not by choice but by necessity.
I received an interesting communication after posting this from someone within OWS who thanked me for telling the truth. The person had spoken out about various issues, and had been told not to speak to the press by OWS leadership about apparent hypocrisies such as the poor treatment of the homeless.
In other words, free speech for me, but not for thee.
I agree with the OWSers on some points, but I calls 'em as I sees them. Too many people on the left are romanticizing the movement and overlooking the bad things. As a result (at least in part, I think) support for OWS among those they claim to want to help (the poor) is declining rapidly.
I calls them as I see them also, Con. If you see OWS as some new brand of hypocrisy from the left, then I doubt very much if anything I say will make a difference. I won't do point/counterpoint on hypocrisy, left vs right. I'd lose my sense of humor.
OWS is not about the left, not about candles and kumbaya, not about pretty coeds and innocence, and it's not about socialism or entitlements. It's about jobs, justice, equality, economic opportunity, good old American values that seem to be very much in decline.
When the troops start coming back from Iraq? Can't find jobs? Won't get much better then, either.
I think it's hilarious. If it's a real, lasting movement it should be able to take a bit of gentle ribbing, for heaven's sake.
i appreciate the dialogue in the comments section here (including the concession that the quote is taken out of context). this is the kind of debate that is needed, too! with a movement of this size and innate complexity, there's going to be exaltation as well as disentchantment.
i agree with Sterling that the movement should be able to take sarcasm especially when it's so artfully done (the bertrand russell piece had me rolling on the floor).
a big difference between the right and the left for me has always been that the political right had absolutely no (real) sense of humor. i'd like for the left to hold on to its sense of humor (especially) in the face of increasing violence, abuse etc.
Con: You have a unique sense of the absurd.*
My sense is each OWS site is somewhat different, but in Boston they are going to be allowed to stay as long as they want, according to the mayor, which creates some problems. The Greenway is run by a non-profit, which makes it available for other non-profits, some of which made plans many months ago to use the space and now can't. OWS says it doesn't care, so now some people can't access a public space because others have commandeered it to their private use. That's not playing nice.
Here there is growing pressure on the people who are still there to declare victory and leave, because they are generating ill-will as described above. The overtime bill is at $600k and counting, which means less money for failing schools, homeless shelters for people who really need them as opposed to those who--I kid you not--went home to their parents from the site for vacation.
Sort of like another famous New Englander, Thoreau, who wrote a book that said he went into the wilds to live deliberately, etc. What he didn't say was that he went home to his parents in Concord on the weekends.
Thank you for this, Con.
Humor is everything.
You have no idea how much I appreciate this.
major fave. ***
It is easier to fight for one’s principles than to live up to them.
-Alfred Adler
In our defense, we all do try in our hangdog incongruity. You have to give us that! *
You're an excellent writer, Con. If you say, "I take a content-neutral point of view," I can believe it. This is great fun to read.
"Prefatory Remarks Towards a Prolegomena to Any Future Study of the Philosophy of Philosophy"
Thanks. I saw an interesting article the other day listing things OWS and the Tea Party agreed on, such as no bailouts. I think everybody agrees on that one except for the guys who got them.
I think everyone agrees on most everything.
No bailouts, yes. If OWS and the Tea Party can agree on the necessity to overturn the SCOTUS decision on Citizens United then true progress can be made.