Top Navigation  
 
U.S. Flag waving
Office Hours Momday - Friday  8 am - 5 pm Pacific 1-800-835-2418
 
Facebook   YouTube   Twitter
 
 
Backwoods Home Magazine, self-reliance, homesteading, off-grid

Features
 Home Page
 Current Issue
 Article Index
 Author Index
 Previous Issues
 Print Display Ads
 Print Classifieds
 Newsletter
 Letters
 Humor
 Free Stuff
 Recipes
 Home Energy

General Store
 Ordering Info
 Subscriptions
 Kindle Subscriptions
 ePublications
 Anthologies
 Books
 Back Issues
 Help Yourself
 All Specials
 Classified Ad

Advertise
 Web Site Ads
 Magazine Ads

BHM Blogs
 Behind The Scenes
 Ask Jackie Clay
 Massad Ayoob
 Claire Wolfe
 Where We Live
 Dave on Twitter
Retired Blogs
 Oliver Del Signore
 David Lee
 Energy Questions
 Bramblestitches

Quick Links
 Home Energy Info
 Jackie Clay
 Ask Jackie Online
 Dave Duffy
 Massad Ayoob
 John Silveira
 Claire Wolfe

Forum / Chat
 Forum/Chat Info
 Enter Forum
 Lost Password

More Features
 Meet The Staff
 Contact Us/
 Change of Address
 Write For BHM
 Disclaimer and
 Privacy Policy


Retired Features
 Country Moments
 Links
 Feedback
 Radio Show


Link to BHM

Living Freedom by Claire Wolfe. Musings about personal freedom and finding it within ourselves.

Want to Comment on a blog post? Look for and click on the blue No Comments or # Comments at the end of each post.



Claire Wolfe

Occupy Your Ownself

Sunday, October 9th, 2011

Everybody, but everybody, wants to get in on the Occupy Wall Street act. Since the leaderless, focusless band of creative protestors began getting media coverage, all manner of commentators have commentated. Multitudes claim to know what OWS really is or really ought to be. Political people who may have something or nothing in common with the vague aims of OWS or the vague band of jugglers, gypsies, drummers, retro-hippies, sincere-if-ignorant fogheads, and genuinely angry activists are cautiously trying to bend OWS to their own purposes.

The third-biggest bonehead ever to win a Nobel Prize, Paul Krugman, demonstrates what an old fogey and conventional thinker he is by urging OWS to coalesce around (his) establishment goals. Oh yeah. Infrastructure investment! That’s worth taking to the streets for.

Democrat party leaders cautiously circle OWS, wondering if they can co-opt it as their R-comrades so quickly and successfully co-opted the Tea Party. When Obama so much as makes a wussy comment in favor of OWS, TV mavens say he wants an Arab spring (never mind that the Arab spring was all about toppling … oops, people like Obama). And R leaders screech that The Big O is supporting mob rule.

The OWS is a bunch of teenage tyrants!. No! The OWS is full of freedom-fighters! Yes, they’re freedom-fighters, but they’re misguided. Let me show the way!

Some of the commenting is enlightening. A lot just takes up space. We comment because we comment in this 24/7 (god, I hate that term) newsworld.

The Christian Science Monitor speculates that newcomers are hijacking the movement. There’s truth in that, as even some of our own hope to influence the OWS in a more informed, freedomista direction. (Good luck, guys!)

Even the Tea Party itself, in its R-approved corporatized form, gets in on the act, sniffing that those people — you know, those grubby sorta-kinda-anarchists in the streets — are nothing like us.

The Monitor retorts: Oh yes, they are.

Meanwhile, Wall Streeters (or at least their Chicago analogs) shout FU! (Um, guys, you might want to watch your step there. That’s the sort of response that historically gets rich-folk guillotined.)

You know things have gone from the sublime to the truly ridiculous when even I get a demand (thoroughly tongue-in-cheek, I devoutly hope) to quit blogging about sick dogs and take up the leadership flag now that OWS shows that the “it” moment is here.

Um … yeah.

Enough, already. Enough, enough, enough!

I’m not against Occupy Wall Street. Nor am I for it. It’s interesting theater. It’s good comment-fodder. It’s certainly a sign that otherwise unemployed people are fed up and furious. It’s an encouraging sign that many are beginning to grasp that politics as usual is a game ordinary folk can’t win. It’s a discouraging sign (per interviews with some of the participants) that even fed-up folk still imagine that government can or will save them from banksters. OMG, will some people never get it?

Yes, OWS makes a good show. And depending on how things go, it might even result in some action from government. Though anyone who expects that action to be good is smoking something better than I’ve ever had.

There’s a persistent myth — myth so potent it’s become accepted history — that the street protests of the 1960s ended the Vietnam war. See? people say, If we just take to the streets in big enough numbers, they’ll have to listen to us!

Actual history shows otherwise. The first demonstrations against the Vietnam war began in late 1963 or early 1964. By 1966 peaceful protests and marches were drawing hundreds of thousands of ardent, earnest participants (I was cutting high school classes to be one of them). The protests reached their height — and turned wilder — between 1968 and 1971.

And when did the fedgov finally wend its leisurely way out of Vietnam? Sometime between 1973 and 1975, depending on whether you count from the gradual withdrawal of troops or the undignified skedaddle of U.S. ambassador Graham Martin just ahead of the victorious North Vietnamese forces.

That’s 10 years. Or more. Can anybody really believe that street protests “ended the Vietnam war”? Not really. And OWS isn’t going to “reform” Wall Street, either. Or accomplish anything else its naive participants hope.

It may and probably will result in police crackdowns, new laws against protest, new surveillance programs, and other forms of suppression. It may result in a host of new laws that pretend to be for “the people” while just doing the usual thing that laws do — put more money and power in the pockets of those who already have enough money and power to buy the laws they like. It may, if it continues to grow, become a memorable cultural phenomenon that someday people will look back on with awe, nostalgia, fondness, or rage.

But change anything for the better? Well, good luck with that.

Would it be fun to join the party (provided some thug doesn’t walk up and pepper-spray you in the face without provocation)? Sure. Would it feel good to shout out, “Hey! I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it any more — and I’ve got friends!”? Sure. It it exciting and meaningful to see Americans get so angry they roar in protest? Absolutely.

But you want real change? Real freedom from those who would impoverish and abuse you for their own benefit? Well, if you’ve been reading my stuff for very long or thinking for yourself since you escaped the government propaganda camps, you know exactly where to find it. If you don’t, then here’s the Big Clue:

YOU are the one thing that government and their Siamese twins in the financial world can’t manipulate, can’t “reform,” can’t control. Your independent mind and your intelligent desire to live separately from their concepts are the most powerful freaking weapons in the whole wide world.

Can government and their incestuous siblings in power really, truly eff up your world? Oh my. It’s the one thing they’re absolutely great at. We always have to work around the damnable things they do, and it gets harder by the day.

But that won’t change if we do them the honor of throwing ourselves at them in protest. That just tells them we believe in their authority.

You want a real freedom revolution? Then go inside your own head and demand that you free you. Heavens, the influence you can have there! The change you can spark! It’s awesome.

You can just go in there and tell your ownself what it needs to do to be more free — and it happens. No v*ting, no protesting, no petitioning, no lawmaking required.

Do the details get complicated? Of course. That’s the nature of the real world. Will outside influences always try to keep you from thinking and living free? Yes. Does individual freedom (as opposed to the eternally elusive ideal of political freedom) require hard, sometimes frustrating, work? Do bears sh*t in the woods politicians sh*t on reality?

Yes, what’s ahead of us is difficult. But it’s difficult no matter what we do — whether we hang our heads and comply, whether we v*te, whether we protest in the streets — or whether we build a homestead, build our skills, build a Good Bad Attitude and establish a freedom bulkhead in an unfree world.

The question is, are you going to give your mind and your life to outsiders, hoping those outsiders — who fundamentally don’t give a damn whether you live or die — will eventually change in your favor? Or are you going to give your mind and your life to you, your ownself — to do with as you think best?

61 Responses to “Occupy Your Ownself”

  1. Water Lily Says:

    Totally agree. It’s fine to participate in group demonstrations but if our heads aren’t straight first, it’s really a waste of time. The PTB will always do what it wants, with or without our approval or our demonstrations.

    I like the dog posts. :-)

  2. Carl-Bear Says:

    Ah… Krugman has never won a Nobel Prize.

    You’re probably thinking of the dubious Economics prize, but the Nobel Committee doesn’t award a prize for economics. What Krugman won was the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Memorial_Prize_in_Economic_Sciences ).

    Frankly, since the Sveriges Riksbank Prize was established by a national central bank, 1) the bias is fairly obvious, and 2) it’s nothing _I_ would brag on.

  3. Richard Says:

    Always perfectly worded and distilled Claire.

  4. EN Says:

    I’m guessing that all one would have to do to gain support from position with the OWS crowd is to promise free health care and education. They’d go for anything given enough free stuff. In that sense they seem totally different than the TP. None of these people care for, or want, freedom. We’re a very small minority in a very large freedom hating country.

    However, there is this. Give up some of one’s sovereignty… at least temporarily. Selling one’s soul (and your body will follow) to the German Central banks, or the US government, is necessary… at least temporarily. I heard it from a German yesterday.
    http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/08/greece-germany-paper-idUSL5E7L80AX20111008

    The world is not a free place and never will be. We’re alone. I made my peace with that a long time ago.

  5. Ellendra Says:

    I have to admit, when I saw that comment calling for you to step up and lead the new “Occupy” movement, my first reaction was to wonder if the spam filter had failed. It’s not that you never struck me as a capable leader, Claire, it’s that you never struck me as wanting to be.

    You’re the one always telling us to lead ourselves, answer to ourselves, be responsible to and for ourselves, govern ourselves, think for ourselves and act on those thoughts ourselves. That person demanding that you lead OWS, did they ever read anything you wrote?

  6. naturegirl Says:

    It sounds so simple, yet ownself is really the only answer….

  7. Darrow “often used my poems to rescue his clients from the electric chair.” | People v. State Says:

    [...] suggested by the poem above and reasons expressed by Thomas Knapp, Gerry Spence, and especially Claire Wolfe, who advises: “Occupy Your [...]

  8. cctyker Says:

    I am self-responsible. Period.

    I accept the consequences of my actions.

    I do not fear my own fallibility.

  9. Jim B. Says:

    Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it. ~George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman, “Maxims: Liberty and Equality,” 1905

    There is also a good article on this blog:

    http://www.thesurlycurmudgeon.com/introduction.html

  10. MamaLiberty Says:

    Why freedom only works from the inside out…

    From the blog of another friend: http://www.vahramsvalley.blogspot.com/

    Man’s universally observable nature, like all principles of reality, is simple and succinct. Every individual person is always seeking to better his own circumstances in life and to avoid all manner of things unpleasant. These concepts are entirely subjective and relative, so what is considered an improvement in quality of life for one individual may not be an improvement at all for another.

  11. Pat Says:

    Whereas the Vietnam War provided a focus for the discontent at that time, the protests today, including the tea party and OWS, are a frustrated response to a generalized discontent among so many people with so many different viewpoints. Noone knows quite what to focus on, but everyone knows our society and America’s actions at home and abroad are out of sync with what we ought to be doing, how we ought to be living.

    The politicians (at every level) are taking advantage of America’s laxness and confusion by passing laws, taxing, intimidating, and building the sort of financial/military/elitist infrastructure that killed off Rome.

    We don’t need “leadership” so much as we need a moral commitment, a “mission” if you will, a return to values that represent social justice and individual responsibility. With that focus in mind, we would be more apt to “throw the bums out” and start rebuilding, inventing, entrepreneuring, and otherwise acting like we own the country again.

    I would hope more protests do take place, and often. The more people complain — about everything! — the sooner they will realize that any _one_ issue is not the problem; the problem lies with the “bums” who can’t fix the problems.

  12. Mic Says:

    I have a slight disagreement with Claire on this one. She calls the group “freedom fighters” which is only true to the point one would call Fidel Castro a “freedom fighter”. From everything I have seen about this group they claim to be the left’s answer to the Tea Party. I have seen a lot of vague things they claim to stand for, but one thing seems to be shinning through and that is a left leaning agenda.

    Personally, at this point, in my own personal evolution I don’t care if someone is left, right or center as long as they don’t go try and elect people or manipulate government to take MY freedom away. If they truly want change outside of what we call politics today, fine.

    However I suspect what they really want is bigger and more intrusive government because the “leaders” of the group talk about things like the “the rich need to pay their fair share” which sounds like socialism, higher taxes, more spending, and bigger government. No thanks, I don’t want any part of any group that wants government to get one person bigger or one dollar bigger. I am looking for smaller, non intrusive, invisible, out of my way government.

  13. Claire Says:

    Mic, actually we don’t disagree much at all. I didn’t call them freedom fighters. I meant that some other commentors called them that. And boy, do I agree with your second paragraph!

  14. Claire Says:

    Ellendra — LOL on the spam filter. I’ll just assume the comment was tongue-in-cheek unless I find out otherwise. Yep, the idea of being a leader makes me want to take a bath. I know leaders can be useful for meeting specific, short-term goals. But anybody who thinks he needs to be “led” into freedom doesn’t get the reality.

  15. Claire Says:

    Carl-Bear. Truth. And the two who out-bonehead Krugman also won a dubious, politicized version of a Nobel Prize. Damn shame to lump all those brilliant chemists, physicists & such in with them.

    All — thank you for another round of great comments.

  16. Ragnar Says:

    Semi-related, here’s a song I just came across… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7JY-pn-OkM&feature=player_embedded
    Sort of a redneck take on the “Justice Day” message.

  17. Jim Bovard Says:

    Great post, Claire! If only the talk shows had the brains or balls to have you on the air to puncture the latest claptrap…

  18. Claire Says:

    Thank you Jim. But just in case any talk shows get such a strange notion … I’m hiding in my cave. And when approached, I bite. Oh yeah, and did I mention I have rabies?

  19. Judy Says:

    Have you seen this? And what do you think?

    http://www.livestream.com/ideacity/video?clipId=pla_3451e3be-594f-4fab-ac3f-1dc7520dfede&utm_source=lslibrary&utm_medium=ui-thumb

  20. Claire Says:

    Judy, I haven’t seen it and the video won’t play for me. What’s it about?

  21. Judy Says:

    It is a video of a gentleman by the name of Tarek Fatahon who is a Muslim who speaks out about our complacency about Islam extremists and the people that our president has surrounded himself with.

  22. gooch Says:

    While the message from the Oath Keepers website continues to broadcast statements about the Occupy groups, our objectives and rephrase what has already been stated in an obvious effort to duck the slings and arrows of world opinion … as a member of the Oath Keepers Board of Directors I personally feel it is necessary to point out that:

    The Board of Directors of Oath Keepers has not, Repeat, HAS NOT “officially” aligned Oath Keepers with ANY Occupy organizations to date.

    Also there has been NO “Official” vote or decision by the Board of Directors on the activation of any Occupy movement.

    Oath Keepers is NOT a part of Wayseers or any of the Occupy movement organizations nor are They “officially” any part of Oath Keepers.
    =====================
    No one has the authority to make “Statements” for the Oath Keepers Organization without the approval of its Board of Directors … No One.
    Unfortunately they are being made anyway.

    [No ... a posting on the OK website, or any other website, does not Equal an Official Announcement by the Board of Directors.]

    FYI;

    We have scheduled a Board of Directors meeting to address this issue and get it [and others] settled once and for all.

    Thank you for allowing me to at least attempt to mend our once clean public image.

  23. Claire Says:

    Judy, it’s been obvious from the beginning that Obama has surrounded himself with idiots. They may be idiots with Ph.Ds, Nobel Prizes, and other fancy credentials. But still, they’re people who have no clue about reality. Fortunately, they’re also having increasingly little influence on reality.

    I really don’t see why I should take one more minute of my life to reinforce the same message.

    Better to spend the time finding freedom.

  24. Brian Wilson Says:

    Since I can’t convince you to come on the air to discuss this most excellent piece, I will be reading it – all of it – to the audience this afternoon.
    Thanks for writing.

  25. Claire Says:

    Brian — Good heavens. You’re amazing. (And remind me not to try to “out-stubborn” you too often.)

    Thank you. But reading all that on the air? Wow.

  26. Brian Wilson Says:

    OK — all I got in was 6 graphs. But 6 DAMN GOOD GRAPHS!

    And then I posted it at WSPD.com

  27. Brian Wilson Says:

    I may be – OK: AM – stubborn. But more than that, I’m a fan of great writing and great writers and great thinkers. That makes you a Trifecta.

    So there.

  28. Just Waiting Says:

    You made your money writing books about freedom and revolution, now you’re proud to declare you’re hiding in your cave once it begins? For someone who promotes freedom, you’re more condescending and dismissive than the Fox News puppets about the Occupy movement. Theatrics and a yeah, good luck with that? People are living in the streets to protest for your, mine our freedom. And you’re in a cave. Good luck with that too.

    I’m not an anarchist or utopian dreamer, I’m a realist and a staunch supporter of my and others’ self-sovereignty. I live almost off the grid, raise my own food, supply my own heat, etc. And I will stand up and support those who have taken to the streets to voice their concerns.

    I guess you made enough from your books to buy your own piece of freedom, and now screw those who come together wanting it for more than just themselves?

    While we all look for those who can do, to do, more, you hide in your cave claiming deadly disease. Sellout, fake, fraud and charlatan are words that come to mind. What a disppointment.

  29. Claire Says:

    Just Waiting — Um, have you ever actually read anything I’ve written?

    You’re entitled to your opinions, of course. But they seem to be based on a view through one very distorted lens!

    And FWIW, I don’t at all agree with your interpretation that the Occupy Wall Street protests represent an “it” moment. I’m not dismissing OWS. I just don’t give it the importance that you do.

    But if you really believe it’s the “it” moment and the beginning of a revolution — then why the heck aren’t YOU out there trying to lead it?

  30. Claire Says:

    Oh yeah — and all that money I’ve made, Just Waiting? How would you like to make $5,000 or $6,000 a year at your chosen full-time occupation? Maybe $8,000 in a really huge year?

  31. Just Waiting Says:

    Claire,
    I’ve read a couple of your books, and I tried to read about the sick dog. I’ve always held your writings and ideas in high regard and considered you a speaker for our way of life. Its a shame you didn’t make much money at it, but I never believed that those who write about “ideals” were in for money. I thought it was about getting a message out. But my bad, and I apologize.

    Maybe I have misinterpretted what I read, but I thought you were promoting self sufficiency, sustainability, a general disdain/distrust of government, and ways to avoid interaction with it and/or ways to gum it up. Well, self is great, I live as self-sovereign as possible, but sometimes we need to set self aside and ALL of us selfs need to come together for the greater good. I believe the Occupy movements are that greater good.

    I don’t claim to know all that is being protested, I don’t know if anyone does. So very, very much is wrong today, and tomorrow ain’t looking so rosy either. We can’t all run and hide in caves, so why shouldn’t people start trying to fix it?. I know that my 2 children are at OWS protesting against “the system” which you have railed against for so long while you, a writer for freedom, claims to want to hide from. America is irreparably broken, and people have come together in a movement to try to do something about it. I would hope they would have the support of everyone who has ever been disenfrachised or screwed by the system, most certainly anyone who has ever published anything that might help them.

    Given the example already set this year in Egypt, Syria, Yemen that people taking to the streets CAN produce political results, I hope the Occupiers are not going to give in until far-reaching and significant change is realized. I’m not an anarchist, but I do not believe that any solution to our problems will be found in the ballot box, each new politician is either already bought by special interest or waiting for the check to clear.

    So yes, I believe this may be the “it” moment. I don’t have the name, curiculum vitae or street cred to lead, so instead I support it to the fullest of my ability. I only hope those who can do more will, and am disappointed when they don’t.

  32. Claire Says:

    Just Waiting — You wrote, “Its a shame you didn’t make much money at it, but I never believed that those who write about “ideals” were in for money. I thought it was about getting a message out. But my bad, and I apologize.”

    Horsefeathers. You’re the one who quite nastily asserted that I must have made big bucks writing about freedom — which proves you do think freedom writers are “in for money.”

    Of course I’m “in for money” — just as librarians, janitors, salesmen, engineers, and burger flippers at McDonalds are “in for money.” Do you think it would be nobler for me to starve? But I assure you that if I were “in for money” in the sense you implied, I’d choose burger flipping over freedom writing.

    I write from passion. But I do not write to fulfill any expectation you may have of me.

    People read books and articles and put their own interpretations on them. Clearly you’ve read mine and taken me to be something I’m not. I’m not responsible for your interpretation.

    One thing I’ve said over and over and over is that we need to be our own leaders. I’ve said many things over the years that should have told you I was never going to take to the streets in any attempt to lead a protest.

    You say you don’t have the name, curriculum vitae, or street cred to lead? Well, that’s a cop out. If you think leadership is so important and you believe OWS is the new American Revolution, then you’re the hypocrite for not being right in there and doing your utmost to rally the troops.

    YOU be the next Robespierre, gods forbid, if such is so important to you. You don’t have to have a diploma or a certificate or a license, you know. Leaders just jump in and lead.

  33. BobT Says:

    We’re off to see the Wizard…
    …and The Mighty Oz says, “Go Away!”
    Does anybody else remember the story? Didn’t these kids on Wall Street ever get to see the movie? Wasn’t the story’s message that they all had what they needed within themselves?

    “In the story, Dorothy is swept away from Kansas in a tornado and arrives in a mysterious land inhabited by `little people.’ Her landing kills the Wicked Witch of the East (bankers and capitalists), who `kept the munchkin people in bondage.’

    “In the movie, Dorothy begins her journey through the Land of Oz wearing ruby slippers, but in the original story Dorothy’s magical slippers are silver [a reference to the bimetallic system advocated by W.J. Bryan]. Along the way on the yellow brick (gold) road, she meets a Tin Woodsman who is `rusted solid’ (a reference to the industrial factories shut down during the depression of 1893). The Tin Woodsman’s real problem, however, is that he doesn’t have a heart (the result of dehumanizing work in the factory that turned men into machines).

    “Farther down the road Dorothy meets the Scarecrow, who is without a brain (the farmer, Baum suggests, doesn’t have enough brains to recognize what his political interests are). [Shades of Marx's critique of peasants!] Next Dorothy meets the Cowardly Lion, an animal in need of courage (Bryan, with a load roar but little else). Together they go off to Emerald City (Washington) in search of what the wonderful Wizard of Oz (the President) might give them.

    “When they finally get to Emerald City and meet the Wizard, he, like all good politicians, appears to be whatever people wish to see in him. He also plays on their fears…. But soon the Wizard is revealed to be a fraud–only a little old man `with a wrinkled face’ who admits that he’s been `making believe.’ `I am just a common man,’ he says. But he is a common man who can rule only by deceiving the people into thinking that he is more than he really is.

    “`You’re a humbug,’ shouts the Scarecrow, and this is the core of Baum’s message. Those forces that keep the farmer and worker down are manipulated by frauds who rule by deception and trickery; the President is powerful only as long as he is able to manipulate images and fool the people. [Politics doesn't change, does it?]

    “Finally, to save her friends, Dorothy `melts’ the Wicked Witch of the West (just as evil as the East), and the Wizard flies off in a hot-air balloon to a new life. The Scarecrow (farmer) is left in charge of Oz, and the Tin Woodsman is left to rule the East. This populist dream of the farmer and worker gaining political power was never to come true, and Baum seems to recognize this by sending the Cowardly Lion back into the forest, a recognition of Bryan’s retreat from national politics.

    “Dorothy is able to return to her home with the aid of her magical silver shoes, but on waking in Kansas, she realizes that they’ve fallen off, representing the demise of the silver coinage issue in American politics.”

    Source: Michael A. Genovese, _Los Angeles Times_, 19 March 1988

  34. Claire Says:

    BobT — Hey, that’s pretty good.

    For a long time, I’d just roll my eyes when people would give elaborate political explanations of The Wizard of Oz. Then I learned that Baum really, really was that political and really did mean it that way. Interesting what you can work into a children’s story. Chess games, politics …

  35. naturegirl Says:

    Just Waiting said: “but sometimes we need to set self aside and ALL of us selfs need to come together for the greater good.”

    In my opinion, that would make “us” just as bad as “them” telling someone what to do….

  36. Claire Says:

    Good darned point, naturegirl.

    Worth noting, too, that the person who says that “we” need to set ourselves aside always — always — means that the rest of us should abnegate ourselves so that we can become servants to his self’s goals.

    Same with “sacrifice,” “team spirit,” and “loyalty.” It always means you sacrifice for what I want. You get on the team to help me meet my goals. You obey me — but I’ll dump you flat in two seconds once I have no further use for you.

  37. -s Says:

    “Given the example already set this year in Egypt, Syria, Yemen that people taking to the streets CAN produce political results,”

    If those are the results that can be produced, I think I’ll pass. I’ll go a bit further: those were major FAILs. Who in their right mind would desire armored cars running down pedestrians?

  38. naturegirl Says:

    :)

    I’d also like to say….JW’s name is pretty accurate, he’s waiting for/expecting an “it” to come along and save/straighten out/fix all the problems…..someone (or plural) to lead a charge that will magically right all the wrongs in the world…..anyone thinking that way will be just waiting for a long time….it starts inside each one of us, it’s up to each one of us, to find a way to live free in the present……

  39. Paul Bonneau Says:

    Eh, I don’t think it’s so bad that they protest, even when they display their economic ignorance in the process. People have to start down the path of awareness somewhere, and for these folks, it’s at this protest. One cannot reasonably expect perfect Austrian analysis from these folks, any more than one can from a gaggle of conservatives at a parade. It’s better than staying home doing nothing, like they were a few weeks ago. Revolutions are messy.

  40. Pat Says:

    I have heard “The Wizard of Oz” was political too, but as a kid, that meant nothing to me, and as an adult, I never went back to re-visit the movie. Think I will now get it and watch, with BobT’s synopsis in hand.

  41. Brent Says:

    at Just Waiting
    “People are living in the streets to protest for your, mine our freedom.”
    Pray tell, just what “Freedom” do the Occupy Wall Street protesters want?
    Puh-leeeeze!

  42. Jim Klein Says:

    > we need to set self aside and ALL of us selfs need to come together for the greater good.

    I don’t get it…the ultimate good is death?

    I mean, a person can’t “set self aside” more than that, right?

    So the ultimate good is death??? That’s amazing; please do tell.

  43. clark Says:

    “…Her landing kills the Wicked Witch of the East (bankers and Mercantilist)…” – There, fixed it for you.

    I suppose you could also substitute fascists in place of Mercantilist,… or The Fed.

  44. J. Eric Andreasen Says:

    Dear Claire,

    I see rumors that they got you in Tora Bora proved misleading.

    Just because you are back in your cave need not preclude msm commentary. The residue WILL wash off… eventually.

    After all, every so often we DO get a new message from you. A message wherein you appear even younger and more vivacious than the prior year(s). Uhh… Whazzup wit dat, girl?

    E.

  45. Claire Says:

    Eric Andreasen, you silver-tongued devil. Hello to you and yours. Special hellos to L.

    “Wazzup wit dat” is dat you’re a charming liar. But in this case, I can’t really say I mind. :-)

    But between being “got” in Tora Bora or making glib noise on the MSM … hm … tough choice, that.

  46. BOVARD » Claire Wolfe’s Great New Novel - Hardyville Tales Says:

    [...] not familiar with Claire’s work, one of the best places to start is her recent column, “Occupy Your Ownself“ – one of the most thoughtful responses to the protests in New York. Her column ignited a brawl on [...]

  47. Lili Says:

    You said “everybody but everybody” wants to get involved with Wall Street. That isn’t true. You can assert your opinion that you think nothing will change due to your age group and experiences-but why deny the younger generation the right to try and learn through trial and error?

    I am assuming because you are a self-reliant Backwoodshomer that can defy even Mother Nature(not even a little bit-Mother Nature was here before us and can shake us off like fleas no matter how well you are prepared) due to your life learned skills but really? Being snarly to people even TRYING to make an attempt because it doesn’t mesh with your views?

    Your whole ideology is why people cannot unite. You run to the hills and stand with a smaller group of like-minded neighbors while belittling those at least making an attempt to learn.

    How perfect life must be for you and yours.

  48. Ajax Says:

    I suppose you’re familiar with Max Stirner. I think what I gather from your column is called Insurrection. I don’t disparage the actions of the protesters, but I do feel that true change starts from within. Unfortunately, things usually seem to have to get really severe before the herd springs into action. I mean, the problems with the economy were a slowly festering sore. Great writng, but I remain cynical when it comes to wholesale change. As Emma Goldman said, ” The most unpardonable sin in society is independence of thought.”

  49. Claire Says:

    Um … Lili, when did I ever deny anybody the right to do anything?

    I have neither the power nor the desire to do any such thing. That you think that a difference of opinion threatens your rights says more about you than it does about me.

    When I was 18, I was in the streets, too. I don’t disparage it or discourage OWS. Nor did I belittle the participants. In fact, I find the movement quite exciting.

    I merely say it’s not the path to freedom — though indeed an individual’s path to freedom may lie through OWS.

    As to being “snarly” and belittling … you really ought to go back and read your own words for examples of that.

  50. Claire Says:

    Ajax, good points, thank you.

    For reasons you state or imply, I think OWS is an encouraging cry of outrage — but like all mass movements, it will be co-opted so profoundly that its original participants won’t even recognize it — or benefit from it (except in benefitting from it as a learning experience or a cultural phenomenon).

  51. Fred K Says:

    Endless bailouts, yet another violation of our rights. Add it to the list of gov’t violations of our rights:
    They violate the 1st Amendment by placing protesters in cages, banning books like “America Deceived II” and censoring the internet.
    They violate the 2nd Amendment by confiscating guns.
    They violate the 4th and 5th Amendment by molesting airline passengers.
    They violate the entire Constitution by starting undeclared wars for foreign countries.
    Impeach Obama, vote for Ron Paul.
    (Last link of Banned Book):
    http://www.amazon.com/America-Deceived-II-Possession-interrogation/dp/1450257437

  52. pUre Warrior Says:

    Individual Sovereign Humans can agree to protest. I think the point is in what I call the awakining. I believe that a critical mass of sovereign humans will depart the USURY sysetm, DISENGAGEMENT the primary weapon and humanity will follow. Like a flock of birds that change direction suddenly. The evil of Usury is a contradiction and will once again colapse upon itself. My final answer is NO.

  53. fin-tastic Says:

    At some point, I think people have a moral obligation to resist evil and not just hide from it. If you lived in Germany in the 1930s, wouldn’t you feel a moral obligation to stand up and DO something about it–even if it carried great risk to your life and liberty? If my neighbors were being dragged off to FEMA camps, it strikes me as selfish and craven to stay holed up in my own cabin living “freely” inside my own head. Admittedly, these are extreme examples. I am NOT saying that FEMA camps are real OR that protesting is the way to go. But it seems to me that your entire worldview of focusing only on YOU leaves no room for notions of heroism, honor, love, or even concern about the suffering of others.

  54. Claire Says:

    fin-tastic, I appreciate your thoughts. But if you truly believe that my worldview (and not just some theoretical freedomista’s worldview) focuses only on me-me-me and negates concepts like honor, love, or concern for injustice or the sufferings of others, then you clearly haven’t read much of what I’ve written.

    When I talk about finding freedom within our own minds the whole purpose is to say that a more free, more just, more brave, more honorable, more moral, more evil-resistant world can ultimately only arise from free individual hearts and minds.

    YES, you’re right. We must resist evil. We must stand against injustice. And we’ll be better prepared to do that when we understand what it is to think and live free.

  55. fin-tastic Says:

    Good response! And great discussion. Bovard’s post directed me here for the first time. I shall return.

    I am all for self-reliance and “internal” freedom, but let us never forget–there is a State to smash! It could happen…

  56. fin-tastic Says:

    …and I look forward to reading more about how you propose resisting evil beyond personal understanding.

  57. Charon Says:

    Claire –

    This is the first post I’ve read by you here on Backwoods Home and I have to say, you are an invariably critically-thinking, logically-assessing, common sense-possessing behemoth. Are you one for first impressions much?

    I simply adore your whimsical and delightful prose as it executes such an overwrought context. The OWS movement needs more intrinsic perspectives drawn to the surface. All hyperbole aside – great, great article.

    By the way, are you doing anything on Saturday night? I haven’t had interesting dinner conversation in several years…

  58. Claire Says:

    Charon, you want to have dinner with a behemoth? Hm. That’s kinda scary …

  59. M P Says:

    What books by Claire Wolfe are hardcover? Large Print?
    Both? .. Thank you

  60. Claire Says:

    MP — Thank you for asking, but none are in hardcover or large print.

    Some are available on Kindle, which will let you adjust the print size so that any book can become large print.

  61. Alex Chabolla Says:

    Nowhere in your rambling, incoherent post was there any sign of intelligence. I provide you with no points and may God have mercy in your soul.

 
 


 
 

 
 
 
 
 
Copyright © 1998 - Present by Backwoods Home Magazine. All Rights Reserved.