The provincial and national media has shone quite the spotlight on a series of protests that started in New York and has since spread to Canada this past week, called ‘occupy Wall Street.’
Based on the arguments aired and from appearances, the Canadian counterparts could be better called occupy ‘dull’ street, as protesters succeed in being both boring and dim-witted.
The protests are a rallying cry for the hard wing of the left wing socialist camp and their soft left and liberal counterparts, so it shouldn’t be surprising that the demands make very little cents, but I can’t help but expect more from the people who ‘occupy’ so much time on the evening news.
First, there is no Wall Street in Canada. Well, there are Wall Streets, but not The Wall Street that started the protests. Like reading the script of a bad play, the protests are predictably against the capitalism they benefit from and are rallying behind the usual suspects.
The protests also fail to make much sense. Organizers are the first to say they do not speak for everyone, and what is presented is a mixed bag of demands so varied it’s hard to find any common points at all.
It seems like the biggest proponents of the movement have been U.S. President Obama and other government leaders, like newly re-elected premier of my home province, Greg Selinger, in Manitoba, who gave the protesters the thumbs up for exercising democracy. It’s almost like the socialists in government (Selinger leads the NDP party) have organized the protests themselves to gain support for moves down the road they would like to make and to distract from activities they may be doing.
Obama’s kind words to the protesters are perhaps the most ironic, as he’s the one who cut the cheques for the big bank bailout many protesters are upset about. Some consider irony the signature of my generation, but even this glaringly obvious case has been lost on the ‘occupy’ movement. Dull indeed.
The Tea Party by comparison in the U.S. is the complete opposite of the ‘occupiers.’ The Tea Party presents a consistent message that makes sense, even the most dim could get it: government should be smaller and should tax less. It works because it’s simple. The leftists ought to take a lesson from their conservative counterparts.
The Tea Party and ‘occupiers’ actually have some common ground too: anger at the big bank bailout. But occupiers reaching out to conservatives is certainly not in the cards, as the behind the scenes dialogue of the left wingers to increase government intervention in all aspects of society is not something anyone with common sense can unite with.
