The rise of the flea party has resulted in a seemingly endless stream of irony, from reports of violence, charges of rape and molestation, theivery, complaints about the “Finance Committee” withholding funds, missing donations, “unauthorized” registering of protests as non-profits*, etc etc etc.
The proverbial straw that finally prompted me to post on it, however, was this story from today:
The Occupy Wall Street volunteer kitchen staff launched a “counter” revolution yesterday — because they’re angry about working 18-hour days to provide food for “professional homeless” people and ex-cons masquerading as protesters.
The irony is so thick you could cut it with a knife…the OWS crowd’s primary complaint (if there can be said to be one) seems to be railing against rich fat cats who make “too much” money and won’t give it to them.
But when people who are worse off than the protesters try to avail themselves of some of the riches of the OWS crowd they’re met with derision and ostracism.
I guess helping out those less privileged than yourself has a cutoff level.
Not to mention the irony of “the homeless” and “the underprivileged” and “the less fortunate” being dismissed by these heartless and greedy protestors in such disparaging terms:
“We need to limit the amount of food we’re putting out” to curb the influx of derelicts, said Rafael Moreno, a kitchen volunteer.
A security volunteer added that the cooks felt “overworked and underappreciated.” Many of those being fed “are professional homeless people. They know what they’re doing,” said the guard at the food-storage area. [bold added – ed]
How un-PC of them.
So…what do you think? Is this nothing more than innocent irony, or does it rise to the level of blatant, unadulterated hypocrisy?
I vote for the latter.
*I loved this one: in the movement that touts itself as purely democratic and self-governing, a member of the Finance Committee provides a lesson in how quickly mob rule can turn into a dictatorship. It’s the very basic mindset of the left that leads to such things. Quoting the member who took the unauthorized action:
“I’ve tried explaining it to them, but they won’t listen to me.”
In other words…”we believe in democracy until the group refuses to make the decisions that we choose for them. We know best so in the event that the democratic decision doesn’t go our way, we’ll just do it anyway. It’s for their own good after all”.
How the leftist members of this movement can ostensibly embrace mob rule, while at the same time actively working to try to tell everyone else how to live their lives in a “socially acceptable” way, is just mind boggling to me. How psychotic does one have to be to try to reconcile those two aims without their head exploding from the cognitive dissonance?