The #Occupy protesters are the new Vandals

Posted by: Phineas on October 30, 2011 at 6:12 pm

**Posted by Phineas

The Vandals were a Germanic tribe that so terrorized the dying West Roman Empire, particularly during the sack of Rome in 455, that later authors used their name to coin a word describing the wanton destruction of anything beautiful or civilized — “vandalism.”

The Occupy movement would seem to be the latest heirs to the “Vandal tradition:” despising the civilization that’s given them so much, making incoherent demands, and engaging in barbaric and even criminal behavior. My blog-buddy ST has done a great job chronicling much of it.

Well, here’s another example for you:

Nearby, small merchants complained that the camp has hurt their businesses, and they fear that a “general strike” called by protesters for Wednesday could further discourage customers. Meanwhile, big companies said the street protests affected their daily operations, and some Oakland residents said they were worried that police, busy with protesters, are even less able to respond to crimes in their neighborhoods.

What business owners said they fear is that the camp will devolve into chaos again, something some said has already begun.

The owner of Sankofa African Arts and Jewelry said that on the two mornings since protesters returned, her front doorway has reeked of urine.

She said her business has declined by 80 percent since Occupy Oakland began.

“I really, really want them to leave,” said the owner, who gave only her first name, Ellen. She has owned her business for 17 years. “What they are doing is making business worse.”

A camp supporter overheard her lament and shouted: “You would have lost your business anyway with the way the economy is going.”

Ellen burst into tears.

Moji Ghafouri said business has gone down 25 percent at her Caffe Teatro. Protesters also smashed one of her windows.

“I’m a small business,” she said. “If you’re against corporations or big business, I’m not them.”

No, you’re not, Moji. Nor is Ellen. But, to the Occupiers, you might as well be. Whatever your politics, these people don’t represent you, regardless of their claims to speak for a mythical “99-percent.” You’re business owners, capitalists. You’re honest people trying to make a future for yourselves. And though you’re not among the wealthiest people in America, that doesn’t matter to the Occupiers. Your sin in their eyes is that you’re willing to work within the capitalist system to build a better life for you and yours, instead of screeching for a barren egalitarianism. That’s why the protester treated Ellen with such nihilistic contempt: to them, you’re all “Little Eichmanns.” To them, you’re just a tool of the hated old order, worthy only of contempt. What you have is theirs to loot and, if they don’t take it, to ruin. What you have built is theirs to tear down.

The Vandals would approve.

Afterthought: Let me here and now express my deep contempt for the mayors, such as Oakland’s Jean Quan, who’ve let these “movements” wreck the lives and businesses of residents unfortunate enough to be stuck in the area. Hiding behind a fig leaf of “respect’ for “tolerance” and “free speech,” these cowards are failing some of the most basic duties of civic governance: the protection of life, property, and public order. Are these business owners and taxpayers second-class citizens, inferior to the “Occupiers?” Do they have no rights?

Do your job, mayors: order the mob to disperse. If they refuse, send in the police and this time don’t call them off.

via Big Government

(Crossposted at Public Secrets)

RSS feed for comments on this post.

22 Responses to “The #Occupy protesters are the new Vandals”


  1. John says:

    Sorry. Public order and property do not trump the first amendment, and you fail to mention anyone’s life being threatened. It sickens me that you presume to call upon one part of the law to supress another. Like a woman who spit on me and called me a baby killer several years ago while I was in DC in my dress blues. Like you, she hid behind the shield of civility that I provided to her in the first place.

  2. George says:

    John, I also wore dress blues but probably a long time B4 you did and hate to hear of your experience. At the same time, consider that the first amendment right ends at yelling “Fire” in a crowded theater and is superceded by an individual’s participation in criminal activities. Are you saying that if I should torch a business or other property, endanger one’s livlihood or wellbeing that it’s covered by my right to freedom of speech??? Nonsense; when you breach either common decency or pose a danger or threat to the publics’ welfare or possessions…you are on the downward slope and must be reined in. Where do your rights end and mine begin???

  3. SteveP says:

    The Occupiers are harming the livelihoods and damaging the property of the people around them, in addition to the damage they’re doing to the public spaces that the taxes of those they’re harming paid for.
    The old saying, “Your right to swing your arm ends at my nose” applies here.
    The 1st Amendment (or any other Amendment) does not confer a right to harm others. You have no claim of right if you don’t respect the rights of those around you. Raise your voice and petition the government for redress of grievances to your heart’s content. Just respect the rights of others while you do it. The TEA parties showed how it’s done.
    I find your claim of being spat on and called a baby killer suspect at best. This isn’t the Vietnam war era.

  4. Seth says:

    Whereas I disagree with John about his interpretation of the first amendment, there are people who still beleive in the whole ‘babykiller’ thing in regards to our soldiers, and refuse to see any difference between Vietnam and Iraq.

    However, PEACEFULLY assembling doesn’t mean you can ‘calmly and without malice’ urinate on someone’s doorstep or suggest destroying their property. Nor is spitting on someone a valid expression of freedom of speech. When you endanger or damage other people’s property, you infringe their rights. A man has the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, but do we not jail criminals? This is straightforward stuff. The protestors are causing damage. The police have a duty to protect. If the movement is causing damage, the police should step in to stop it.

  5. John says:

    George, while I find the OWS rabble distasteful, I do not see that they are, as a group, creating such a public menace as to have their liberties curtailed. I am all for arresting those who breach the peace, but I find the thought of supressing all because of the actions of some to be rather more serious.

    SteveP, if you would like I would be happy to provide you the opportunity to call me a liar to my face at your earliest convenience. Otherwise, I invite you to STFU.

  6. John says:

    On second thought, I will thank everyone for the civil debate, and hope that it will always be so. My apologies to anyone who I may have offended.

  7. George says:

    pax vobiscum, John

  8. parentofed says:

    My local laws prohibit erecting semipermanent structures including tent posts and overnight sleeping in public-owned areas. Are permits required? Even on private land, there are public health & safety laws.
    The law is what’s important. If they’re obeying laws, they should be left alone. If they’re breaking laws, they should be arrested. The police cannot favor/disfavor a specific group. The Oakland mayor is an idiot.

  9. Great White Rat says:

    If John’s old enough so that “several years ago” means the Vietnam era, then I do not doubt that what he said happened, since I saw the same thing. I’ve seen no reports of it happening since then, but the lunatic left hasn’t changed much, so I’d not be surprised if it did happen. I’m inclined to believe him.

    That said, he’s all wet on his main point. Freedom of speech and assembly does not confer the right to damage the property of others, nor to assault others. And keep in mind that the Constitution specifies that the people have the right to assemble peaceably. When the OWS crowd begins to defecate on the property of others, or steal from others, or otherwise damage the neighborhood, they are no longer peaceable. They have become a violent mob and the local authorities have every right to restore order and protect the liberties of citizen who are being harmed by the mob.

  10. Marshall Art says:

    I would say that merely interfering with the normal flow of business traffic is a step beyond peaceably assembling. Isn’t that a violation of the Rico Act? I don’t recall any such complaints regarding business being down during the Tea Party rallies.

  11. bobheb says:

    Defecate on my front yard and see what right I use against you.

  12. SteveP says:

    SteveP, if you would like I would be happy to provide you the opportunity to call me a liar to my face at your earliest convenience. Otherwise, I invite you to STFU.

    Now I’m sure you’re lying. This has all the hallmarks of a lefty troll going for the Absolute Moral Authority ploy.

  13. CAMom says:

    One person’s rights cease to exist when they trample on another person’s rights. I agree that the Mayors of these ‘occupied’ cities need to step up to the plate and treat these thugs as they would if it was one person, rather than a mob. Order the mob to disperse, send in the police, and arrest any and all who remain. Enough is enough…

  14. Chris in NC says:

    First off, if John says it happened, I believe him. I remember many stories of the Iraq war vets being belittled by aged hippies in airports and other places.

    That being said, I don’t have one ounce of sympathy for the businesses. Ellen of Sankofa African Arts and Jewelry voted for the democrats and supported them before they started on her front door. If they had not occupied her front door, she’d still have no problem with them. She’s getting a taste of what she wanted others to get. Ditto the other businesses there. By and large far left democrats who are now getting what others have received over the years. Let ’em suffer and let em die out. When they have to beg for scraps, maybe, they’ll get a clue.

  15. Carlos says:

    To Chris: Hear! Hear!

  16. Great White Rat says:

    Chris, if you’re right – and I didn’t see anything in the story that said Ellen voted for the Democrats – then I can sympathize with your thoughts, but can’t agree that it justifies letting the mob run rampant. Letting the mob do as they please to any business in he area because some or even many of them supported Democrats isn’t a solution.

    Now, if we had a way to check the voting record of each business owner, and direct the mob to use only Democrat businesses as their urinals, I’d be with you completely. But it’s not a perfect world.

  17. Chris in NC says:

    GWR, I didn’t say it was right. I just said I have no sympathy. Lie with fleas, you get dogs…

    Ellen has an African Arts store. African centered. Arts. That gives a 99.9% chance on being liberal.

    I don’t support letting a mob run wild. Not at all. I think they should have crop dusted these places with pepper spray. But as you said, not a perfect world.

    However, if a leftist mob is going to run wild, I am glad it’s leftist stores that are primarily the ones getting crushed by them.

  18. Carlos says:

    Just so you don’t misunderstand my response, too, GWR, I also do not support targeting businesses by the OWS animals.

    That said, it is such businesses as mentioned that have loosened the plague on our country known as SanFranNan, Babs and Diane Feinstein. They are also the ones who support such an illustrious line of socialist locals that have basically removed freedom from that area of the country and made government there so oppressive.

    When they stop screwing themselves with all their intellectual pap and crap, then I might start feeling sorry for their plight, but at least not until then. They have created a curse on the country.

  19. John says:

    The thought has occured to me that these people will soon “qualify” as homeless in some states and municipalities. When does one become a vagrant? I am also wondering how a TB outbreak will be handled. And what about voter registration? I personally continue to think they should be left alone as much as possible. They hang like a millstone on the Dems, they are living examples of what is wrong with the “entitled” class of this country, and they are ill-prepared for winter. All of the right people seem to be suffering. I feel bad for the local business owners and residents in some cities, but not in others, for reasons cited by Carlos. I would think everyone here could simply put aside their ire at these imbeciles and enjoy the prospect of a bitter winter. Either they slink off in defeat, or they suffer for their stupidity. It sounds like a win-win as far as I can see. What I don’t want to see is them give Obama any excuse for declaring martial law.

  20. RageFury says:

    John – “Sorry. Public order and property do not trump the first amendment, and you fail to mention anyone’s life being threatened.”
    Sorry John your rights and liberty end where mine begin. You do not have the right to breach mine while exercising yours.

    “It sickens me that you presume to call upon one part of the law to supress another. Like a woman who spit on me and called me a baby killer several years ago while I was in DC in my dress blues.”
    And you do not have the right to refuse anyone their rights because you think yours are more important.

    You can exercise your free speech as much as like, but when it starts destroying property and ending lives you have crossed the line and must deal with the consequences.

  21. John Clearly hasn’t seen the videos or read any of the stories of vandalism, rape, beatings, public masterbation or defecation that is happening in ALL major Obamaville camps.
    I’d direct you to my youtube playlist for an eyeful of miscreant activities:
    There is over 8 hours off footage there. Have fun.

    As to ST’s comment on Mayor Quan – I am 100% in agreement. This woman is protecting criminals over law biding citizens and busines owners.– yes Criminals, because that is what they are at this point.

  22. Oh and John, the 1st Amendment does not protect these idiots from their rampaging — peaceful assembly w/ a proposal of grievances is the exercise of free speech. Rioting, assaulting police and destroying public property is NOT.