Occupy Wall Street – Libya, Adbusters and Should Libertarians Get Out Now?
By Staff News & Analysis - October 10, 2011

"Occupy" protesters garner increased support … In New York, the protest is called "Occupy Wall Street" – but around the nation, where the movement is picking up steam, it's being called "Occupy Together." This week, CBS News correspondent Michelle Miller reported on "The Early Show on Saturday Morning," demonstrations were held in more than a dozen cities, from Los Angeles to Richmond, Va., to downtown Minneapolis, Minn. In Minneapolis, one demonstrator told CBS News, "We're here because we want the big dudes to start paying." – CBS

Dominant Social Theme: Occupy Wall Street is unstoppable, a spontaneous force of nature.

Free-Market Analysis: Occupy Wall Street is not what is seems, or what the mainstream media is portraying it as. Occupy Wall Street is a pincer movement utilizing "directed democracy" and the "transparency" meme, which we have analyzed in previous reports.

Over at websites such as those controlled by Alex Jones there is interesting reporting on the socialist takeover of Occupy Wall Street. But from what we can tell, there's something even deeper going on within the ranks of Occupy Wall Street, something that's been there from the beginning.

It's a NEW dominant social theme in our view, one that's now apparently to be promoted by the Anglosphere power elite as part of the advancement of the gobalist movement. Of course, one could argue that socialism and communism use the paradigm of "direct democracy" as well. But in these political movements, direct democracy was just one part of a larger, communal philosophy – one, of course, that never worked out.

In fact, the emphasis on direct democracy provides the powers-that-be with a kind of political portmanteau. It may serve as a one size fits all solution that can be exported throughout the world within the context of global government. The "transparency meme" we've written about seems to be a restatement of the problem (government corruption, etc.) that "direct democracy" will address.

One of the main modern proponents of direct democracy was Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi. Gaddafi's famous Green Book (like Mao's little red book) was a revolutionary primer. His idea, apparently was that Libya would be run via direct democracy; this sort of organization would inform the the "brother-leader" of what to do.

This could be one reason why Gaddafi has been hounded out of office – presumably to be shot. If the Western elites are about to adopt his ideas wholesale, it doesn't really make sense to leave him hanging around, agitating for the credit.

Nobody ever said the Anglosphere power elite in aggregate was stupid – and its fear-based promotions can work at a fairly sophisticated level. This direct democracy meme is not only a sophisticated one, it's one of the most ambitious we think we've seen yet. This is the shot heard round the world. The Big Kahuna. This may be the beginning of the final push for world government.

The whole scenario puts us in mind of one of the very best big-budget movies ever made, "Mars Attacks." Given what we've just suggested, free-market types are understandably having trouble making their voices heard and we thus present the script of a tiny "Mars Attacks" vignette to remind them of what they may have to do …

US President Jack Nicholson on the phone to France: "Hallo, Maurice. Ca va?"

Maurice (from France): "Bien! I have some good news for you. The Martian ambassador is here and we have negotiated a settlement."

Nicholson (quite perturbed): "Maurice, get out of the room, get out now!"

Small-bodied, big-headed Martians begin to shoot their ray guns at the French diplomats and in the background, the Eiffel Tower topples.

See, it may be the best thing free-market types can do at this stage – GET OUT NOW. We keep discovering more and more about the "spontaneous movement" that makes us uneasy. In fact, we want to thank DB feedbackers David Robertson and "concernedforfreedoms" for providing further insights into Occupy Wall Street's obscured beginnings

Just the other day, he posted a feedback linking Gaddafi, Occupy Wall Street, Adbusters (the organization behind it all) and the professional, academic "anarchist" David Graeber who ties the various (apparently elitist) components of this enterprise together. The initial key is that Adbusters is apparently being funded in part by the same elitist foundation crowd that funds PBS and other power-elite promotional media, including the George Soros-funded Tides Foundation. InfoWars and the New American, among others, have reported on this funding stream.

Professional, academic "anarchist" David Graeber and his (Gaddafi-like) "direct democracy" … provides us with the spectacle of supposedly leaderless groups making decisions that then through some sort of osmosis become the standard for the larger whole. Again, Graeber defines himself as an "anarchist," though some of his solutions, theoretically, might find a home in Marxist or socialist practices.

The emphasis on consensus is startling. It's very clever, too, a way of exercising dominance without seeming to. There are now Youtube videos in which you can see the chanting ritual that takes place between the supposedly leaderless groups and "moderators," leading to an eventual "decision." Matt Drudge (Drudge Report) posted one on his website last night: "VIDEO: 'Occupy Atlanta' in strange group chant, ritual …" (See today's featured video)

Oh, poor children! Youngsters are so impressionable at that age stuck between childhood and adulthood. They are being manipulated in our opinion. This direct democracy didn't work in Libya and it won't work anywhere else. All it does is provide a paradigm for world government.

So … Graeber, who used to work for Yale and now works for another academic institution as a "social anthropologist" is the inspiration behind this theorizing. But there sure are questions about the implementation. We recently posted an interesting report from Webster G. Tarpley of alternative webblog, as follows:

Occupy Wall Street: Who Wants to Hijack the Movement? … Eyewitness observers suggest that the deliberations of the general assembly are largely a diversion, and that real power is being increasingly concentrated in the hands of about 20 mysterious and anonymous individuals who appear to make up a kind of covert steering committee that pulls the strings on the general assembly, or else goes around it completely. The members of this cadre of mysterious operatives are not as young as the average demonstrator. The secret leadership is made up of people ranging in age from 25 to over 40, with the older ones occupying the key posts. Many of them appear to be active duty or recently retired military …

OK … 'Nuff said. Let's look at the other side of the pincer. Recently, we analyzed a New York Times article on the blossoming protest around the world. The article seemed to come from nowhere and made a series of curious statements. We wrote: "The closest the article comes to providing a clue is in a paragraph toward the end stating that, 'emerging movements, like many in the past, could end up being absorbed by traditional political parties.' But the paragraph ends with a dangling statement, 'Yet purists involved in many of the movements say they intend to avoid the old political channels.'" (Read the article here: Transparency Meme Creeps Closer.)

And we added, "Now, what the heck does that mean? Who are these 'purists' and what are the 'new' political channels being contemplated? This is a pure promotion being rolled out, cold-bloodedly and with cold calculation. Promotions never reveal the solutions all at once. There has to be a steady drumbeat of 'problems' first to capture the attention."

Well, now we think we know. The solution is to be direct democracy. Libertarians who want to reduce the protest to one basic, powerful theme – end central banking – are likely going to find out that it will be impossible to make their voices heard. They are going to be drowned out by the screamers who want corporate blood and want the bankers "punished."

Direct democracy is the vehicle that will accommodate these elitist-backed aims. It is "the people" that will speak, demanding that "their" government "do something" about private sector corruption. Nancy Pelosi and Barney Frank will be glad to oblige, of course. They're taking orders from the Anglosphere power elite and could care less about the private-sector business of intermediation.

They'll be happy to put Wall Street crooks in jail all day long. Corporate executives, too. Everyone will feel better but nothing much will change. In fact, it is the power elite that will benefit. After all, in the long run, money and power controls governments, especially "democratic ones." Nothing is much easier than buying a vote (and a politician), so long as you have the money. And if you run central banks around the world, you will ALWAYS have the money.

Libertarian, anti-Fed types that understand the criticality of reducing the clout of central banking may want to form their own parallel protest, even link to Alex Jones's "End the Fed" efforts somehow. It may be important to do it now before the Occupy Wall Street protests are established at an international level and create a voice that drowns out everything else.

This may be the plan: Another bloody French Revolution, on a rhetorical level anyway. a final push to ensure the State is empowered globally by civilian anger at the so-called private sector. Direct Democracy could be presented as the solution, the vehicle (along with the Internet) whereby "transparency" is facilitated.

Of course, who knows if the Occupy Wall Street protests truly have "legs." Will they expand into an international movement as seems planned? Will they travel down a direct democracy or socialist path? Will the protests take a true libertarian turn? Time will tell. What we do believe, surely is that the globalists are committed to their goals and that the current demos increasingly seem to represent an expansion of elite manipulations.

Editor's Note: Over at HenryMakow is an article claiming that Occupy Wall Street is the work of Serbian contract revolution organizers in Belgrade and their field operative organizer company,"OPTOR!" The article is entitled "Occupy Wall Street is COINTELPRO (Phony Opposition)" and tracks what we mentioned on Saturday, that Occupy Wall Street seems to have elements of the worldwide "youth" movements organized in part by the US State Dept. and AYM. Webster Tarpley obviously believes something along these lines, as well. (See our Saturday's video introduction "Interview Raises Interesting Questions about Occupy Wall Street Volunteers.")

After Thoughts

And yet … as we've written regularly, this is the era of the Internet Reformation. The powers-that-be may find manipulation a lot more difficult in the 21st century than the 20th. Yes, there may be (generally) considerable pushback from libertarians, free-market thinkers and those who believe in the re-establishment of liberty rather than an expansion of globalist corporatism via central banking mercantilism. Maybe these forces will upend Occupy Wall Street as well. Or maybe it will prove impossible to work within the protest's current paradigm. Get out now, Maurice, and go it alone?

Share via
Copy link
Powered by Social Snap