Stop Me Before I Vote Again

What gives you the impression Obama is "in charge"? Isn't he just some sort of concierge?

Indeed. But was Mubarak in charge, either? Wasn't he just some sort of concierge, too? If it was reasonable for the Tahrir crowd to demand the ousting of a concierge -- why is it unreasonable for us?

Of course it's just a starting point. But not a bad one. Rather better than electoral college reform, or some revision of the tax code.

I think it would be more fun to just demand that Obama dress up in a doorman's uniform and stand in front of Goldman Sachs opening doors and carrying baggage for the partners. Look, I'm a confirmed believer in the condensed 18th Brumaire program: skip the damn tragedy, already, and go straight for the farce.

Wel, I wouldn't object to that either. But the original question was, What would be the Amurrican equivalent of the Tahrir Square program? Which is actually a very good question, isn't it?

"These people have no sense of fun. Don't you love imagining an American Tahrir focussed on getting Obama out?"

I guess they figure if the new boss is going to be the same as the old boss then why bother?

That's why I'm just a wicked and vengeful old fart who'd be entertained by hanging an entire succession of bosses from gibbets and then pointing and laughing.

Would it do any good? Probably not, but then it wouldn't do much harm either so far as I can tell.

but then it wouldn't do much harm either so far as I can tell.

'Cept for the folks that got their asses kicked, gassed, and shot for the sake of some old fart's lamppost aesthetics. I mean, damn. At least the old fart righties who ask us kids to go do stupid fatal shit are gonna steal a bunch of money off it.

"Cept for the folks that got their asses kicked, gassed, and shot for the sake of some old fart's lamppost aesthetics. I mean, damn. At least the old fart righties who ask us kids to go do stupid fatal shit are gonna steal a bunch of money off it"

I detect a person who takes himself (and off hand comments in a blog) far too seriously.

However, I'm not asking you to do shit pal. I'd perhaps have a few suggestions for what you might go do to yourself, but I'll be polite and refrain.

I detect a person who takes himself (and off hand comments in a blog) far too seriously.

this is a very serious accusation!

They at least need better signs.

"Don't you love imagining an American Tahrir focussed on getting Obama out?"

No, I do not love to imagine a massacre, for I am not a sociopath.

"But whoever did succeed Obie -- captain, or colonel, or knight in arms -- would have a new-found respect for the mob, don't you think?"

Respect? For the useful idiots running interference and drawing fire from loyalist forces while the military stages a coup? Again, no.

Michael, what is the event on Fri? The link was screwy.

Friday event is a protest against police repression. I'll try to find a better link.

This comment thread has devolved depressingly into a collection of loopy irrelevancies. It's surprising to me how nobody seems able or inclined to address the quite good and simple question that started it: What would be the 'demand' of an American version of Tahrir Square? We all approve of what happened in Tahrir, right? We all wish something like it would happen here, right? So what would that look like?

"So what would that look like? "

OK, this time I'll be serious about it.

Unfortunately, it'd probably be more along the lines of what Mr. Chooses to Be Anonymous (but sounds like Leon Trollski) is implicating. Also a lot like what it's turned out to be in Egypt.

A military government promising to hold "free and fair" elections and the eventual installation of a new government after some number of months or years. It's doubtful the newly installed government would be any better than the one we've got and to be honest I'd be betting that it could be quite a bit worse.

Yes, it's true, things could be worse.

Tarhir? In the United States of America? Well, we'd need to rent limos, because I'm not taking a bus. Then we'd need to ensure that there was plenty of water so people don't get dehydrated. And permits! We're going to need a lot of permits. How much would it cost for Michael Moore to do an appearance? My cousin's aunt knows Michael Landon's son, maybe he could talk about his dad. I'm going to lock up the name "AmericanTarhir" on Twitter and start spreading the word. What day is this happening again? Maybe we should run this by MoveOn, because I wouldn't want to disrupt what they have going on.

Paul for the win.

Let's piss in this pot for a minute: what made the Tahrir protests successful (in the short term) were specifically Egyptian conditions. Five years of relatively invisible labor organization, strikes and work stoppages. A commitment to comparative anonymity. Food and medical treatment collectives, during the actual unrest. The yutes resisted being commoditized as Radicals™ on their home ground, despite being used that way by the "social media" prophets, in the English speaking press.

The folks "occupying Wall Street" are doing something, certainly. It's just that they're doing it for the wrong cameras. The corporate press is the mediator whose attention they're trying to gain. There are advantages to getting any press a group can scavenge, but they're also dangling in less-than-uselessness, on the whims of that lack of even negative coverage.

And they're asking for what's coming to them, because their occupation is just silly, in the end. It is puppets and bad signs and the willingness to be corralled into free speech zones.

Ain't no fucking Tahrir coming from that. At best, they'll get a flurry of re-tweets to @AmericanTahrir™ and a court date to brag about back at the dorm.

An actual occupation of Wall Street will be a whole lot messier and a fuckload less well behaved...

but sounds like Leon Trollski
Naw. if I forgot my tag I would confess it. And if I was sockpuppeting I'd be less transparent.

So what would that look like?
Not much like Egypt turned out I don't think. At least not with a military dictatorship at the end unless we got one through the mechanism of the military squishing the aspiring tahirists. Egypt WANTED the army types in charge. the US .mil just doesn't play that same social role. no 'soldier- friend of the people' signs here.

As to what would happen rather then what wouldn't, I haven't a clue. Theres a fairly extensive chain of succession for the pres should he go. But a group demanding the ouster of the guy in charge probably aren't gonna want his #2 or even his #242 at the helm. If not them and not the army then, who? A coalition gubmint from the protesters themselves? That seems to overreach the tahir scenario by quite a bit. Maybe focus on structural changes and demand a second constitutional convention. With any throwing out of suits being a bonus.

"the US .mil just doesn't play that same social role. no 'soldier- friend of the people' signs here"

I'll have to completely disagree with this statement. It's ignoring the fact that the US military is the most trusted institution in the country. And as you pointed out the folks who managed to oust the top guy wouldn't be happy with #2 or #242 or any of the rest of them.

http://www.kpbs.org/news/2011/jun/23/us-military-most-trusted-all-american-institutions/

A power vacuum like that would be something Mr. Patraeus and his buddies in the military/industrial/homeland-security complex would be more than happy to fill, with happy scrubbed and crew cut smiley faces all around and a promise to hold elections really really soon.

"What would be the 'demand' of an American version of Tahrir Square?"

Obama out! Free ponies for everyone! Eternal youth! Or, the one 'demand' with nonzero chance of being met: Business as usual!

"We all approve of what happened in Tahrir, right? We all wish something like it would happen here, right?"

No, and no.

"So what would that look like?"

A bloodbath.

i vote for the doorman for a day demand...and ...a blood bath

btw
we had our square dance
it was in madison last whenever

this is bossanova nueva york

Mr. Chooses to Be Anonymous says:

"bloodbath"

The esteemed Mr. OP chimes in and votes for the same:

"i vote for the doorman for a day demand...and ...a blood bath"

I ask, out of the revolutions in large countries since, say... the time Boris Yeltsin sat on a tank and stared down a right wing coup to now, how many Armies have provided the blood bath being predicted here?

One? Two? None?

You'll be graded on your answers.

I feel that the ubiquitous nature of modern media makes blood thirsty types who might be of a mind to initiate bloody reprisals think twice. They'll be on camera for the whole world to see while they do it.

Well, damn, this is depressing. Think I'll go cut my throat.

"They'll be on camera for the whole world to see while they do it."

Oh noes the world is watching! Björk will change her Free Tibet t-shirt for a Free New York one!

More like, the whole world will be reminded how empire works, now and always, in Rome, Beijing, or Washington: Submit or face extermination. It's laughable that you presume to test others on history when you've already forgotten the lesson of Fallujah. That was a remote province. You really believe the empire will be *more* tolerant of a popular uprising in its center of economic power?

Fallujah? Please...

That's relevant to a popular uprising how?

If you're not even gonna try then I'm not wasting anymore time on you.

"You really believe the empire will be *more* tolerant of a popular uprising in its center of economic power?"

No, and I never said that. What I'm saying is that the empire might, if a few hundred thousand people showed up in Times Square, decide to replace one figure head with another while business would continue as usual instead of murdering them all.

Anyway, anonymous, I don't know who pees in your cheerios every morning but you are one cranky old son of a bitch.

"Well, damn, this is depressing. Think I'll go cut my throat. "

Cheer up MJS, your message seems to be reaching more people all the time.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/28/world/as-scorn-for-vote-grows-protests-surge-around-globe.html?_r=1

My apologies, dp, but in my own defense *you* did bring up the "r" word.

Anyway...

"the empire might, if a few hundred thousand people showed up in Times Square, decide to replace one figure head with another while business would continue as usual"

I agree with you that a few hundred thousand people are capable of achieving...nothing, while making a lot of noise doing so. There would still be a lot of beatings and arrests, as there already have, you must admit. There are surely less painful ways of doing nothing, right?

"There are surely less painful ways of doing nothing, right?"

That's debatable, but still, I'm all ears.

What's your suggestion?

It's not debatable at all. What part of "doing nothing" do you not understand? Keep your head down and your mouth shut. Don't attract the attention of security forces. Don't protest. The state will still mistreat you, in keeping with its nature, but in its own time. Protest amounts to saying, "Me next! Oh, beat me next!"

Another sort of "doing nothing" can actually reduce the amount of suffering in the world rather than just maintaining it, but it's already too late for you dp: Don't breed. Every new human life is doomed to be a victim or a perpetrator of state violence. End the cycle.

Anonymous...

I must say, you'd make a great Buddhist. Life is suffering! Existence is vanity!

Having been there myself I completely understand. I don't agree, but I understand.

Why not smack the state back a little, if its gonna smack you nihilism anon? Sure its probably pointless. yeah it might hurt. Pointless, painful and pointlessly painful actions all seem pretty much a part of the human experience to me. Besides, fuckers deserve it.

Hopelessness does not demand or even suggest inaction in my mind. Though, it may imply a different ratio of educate/organize/agitate.

A sign of my ignorance but who knows about these parties?

http://www.pp-international.net/

Potential signicance?