Saturday, December 17, 2011

Bill Ayers and Occupy Harrisburg: Debate Is Done

Paul Hairby Paul Hair 



Bill Ayers speaking to a crowd at the Midtown Scholar Bookstore in Harrisburg, PA on December 14, 2011. Occupy Harrisburg invited Ayers to speak.  Photograph © Paul Hair, 2011.


This is the second time I have covered Occupy Harrisburg.

Bill Ayers spoke at the Midtown Scholar Bookstore in Harrisburg, PA on December 14 at the invitation of the militant Occupy Harrisburg. I estimated between 100 and 200 people attended the event.

Eric Papenfuse owns the Midtown Scholar Bookstore. Papenfuse, a former public school teacher, previously invited Ayers to speak in south-central Pennsylvania in 2010. He wrote an OP-ED explaining why he did so and The Patriot-News published it, revealing his radical, anti-capitalist views.

I summarize the night in a list of bullet points in the following section but I don’t go into extremely thorough commentary because there is a bigger point here than Bill Ayers and Occupy Harrisburg.

One final note: I break this document into two parts: the first part contains the summarization of the event. The second part is where I discuss the bigger point than Bill Ayers and the anti-free-market Occupy Harrisburg. 

Those who wish for a shorter read may only wish to read the first part.




PART I:

Event Summary:
  • Ayers said he has been to about 14 Occupy events. This admission helps to unravel the narrative that the Occupy insurgency is some sort of grassroots movement of people who are disadvantaged and who have had their wealth stolen. The Occupy insurgency is well-funded and being led and/or supported by hardcore, powerful leftists. (See “Corporate Collaborators” by Mark Steyn, “The Rich Are Not Conservative” by Bruce Walker, and “Meet the Staff of Occupy Wall Street’s Downtown Manhattan Offices” by Lachlan Markay for additional consideration.)
  • I found Ayers far less articulate and convincing that I had expected he would be—certainly far less than John Luciew of The Patriot-News found him when he wrote his glowing puff piece on Ayers and his appearance at Dickinson College in nearby Carlisle during February 2011. The so-called facts that Ayers presented were clearly false and his rhetoric amusingly immature.
  • The mainstream media, the Democrats, and Barack Obama supposedly aren’t leftist enough for Bill Ayers, Occupy Harrisburg, and other hard leftists. This isn’t a surprising revelation to anyone who has any knowledge of leftists—they are, after all, never satisfied no matter how much they get. However, while Ayers repeatedly complained of the mainstream media (even citing institutions such as NPR, The New York Times, etc. by name), the Democratic Party, and the president as not being leftist enough and as being part of the problem, I don’t think he truly believes that.

    I don’t doubt that Ayers would like a more communist nation than what we already have. Yet I also don’t think he views the mainstream media, the Democrats, and the president with as much contempt as he displays. I think it is an act. If one understands Ayers and his comrades, and understands that their goal simply is to destroy the system so as to create a power vacuum into which they and the other communists can fill (see the Cloward-Piven strategy, or the Muslim Brotherhood and the Arab Spring), then one understands that it is advantageous to them all to encourage hatred of whomever holds national power. In other words, they want to collapse the national government in order to fulfill their revolution. And so it suits Ayers and the other communists’ purpose to say that the mainstream media, the Democrats, and the president aren’t leftist enough.

    What furthers my belief that this is the case is the fact that a     “William Ayers” has been seen on White House dumps of visitor logs. There is no way to “prove” that the “William Ayers” on the logs are indeed Bill Ayers, but it’s too big of a coincidence to think otherwise. (See what Andrew Breitbart had to say about “false positives” in the White House visitor logs.)

    So while Ayers publicly disparages the mainstream media, the Democrats, and the president, in truth he very much allies with them.
  • Ayers and the Occupy insurgency openly associate with the Arab Spring and their revolutions which overthrew their national governments. Ayers mentioned how he had worked with the Egyptians who eventually helped overthrow the Egyptian government. I realize that this is not new information but it further demonstrates just how close the ties of these revolutionaries are.
  • Ayers and the Occupy insurgency promoted every leftist cliché possible (the U.S. persecutes sodomites and they don’t have equal rights; communism might not have worked in the Soviet Union, China, and elsewhere but that’s just because it wasn’t done right—meanwhile, capitalism has proved that it is a failure and cannot succeed no matter what; anarchy is a legitimate political philosophy; suburbia is bad; the U.S. Armed Forces are evil; the U.S. should eliminate the DOD; the U.S. should eliminate all prisons, etc.).
  • Ayers lies easily. Case in point: he repeated the oft-told lie that the poor are unjustly drawn to serve in the Armed Forces. So while he claims (when asked) that he agrees that the communism that the Soviet Union and China tried failed, I doubt he really believes that. I believe that he would eagerly embrace a Soviet Union in America and that he only doesn’t admit so now because he feels it is advantageous for him not to do so.


The Midtown Scholar Bookstore in Harrisburg, PA, located at the intersection of 3rd Street and Verbeke Street. Photograph © Paul Hair, 2011.

PART II:

Bill Ayers Is Mainstream:

I mentioned at the start of this piece that there was a bigger point to the night than Bill Ayers and Occupy Harrisburg. And here it is: America has generally accepted Bill Ayers as an upstanding member of society; he no longer is recognized as an extremist. In short, he is the mainstream. America and the American People are not what they once were.

Read what Mike Adams wrote in, “Judging Mrs. White,” or the transcript and referenced links from a segment of The Rush Limbaugh Show on April 05, 2010 entitled, “Is It Conservatism’s Finest Hour?” for other perspectives on how much America and its People have changed. (I particularly recommend, “Uplifting,” by April Gavaza and “Paul Rahe’s America doesn’t exist anymore” by Kathy Shaidle—both referenced in Rush’s transcript.)

Debate Is Done:

Ayers being mainstream reveals that debate is done. The left has used “debate” to distract conservatives and other non-leftists from doing anything useful and to instead spend our time endlessly writing (such as I am doing now) and appearing on TV to defend our very existence. Meanwhile, the left has spent decades implementing its goals into public policies and social acceptance, and it continues doing so ruthlessly and without apology. That’s why Bill Ayers is mainstream. The left doesn’t apologize for what it believes and what it does. Immorality and murder are perfectly fine with leftists if they advance their goal. Thus, Ayers is a good guy to them and they’re not even going to “debate” that point—they are simply going to force the public to accept it. In fact, that is why Ayers is a “martyr” to them when someone opposes him. (Meanwhile, the Right can’t even make martyrs out of the people Ayers murdered. This shows the heart of the problem: the left is passionate; the Right is not.)

Writing and appearing on TV are fine and serve a purpose, but if that’s all conservatives and other non-leftists do—if we don’t actually start implementing our goals into public policies and social acceptance—then there is zero chance of us ever reversing what now is our disastrous defeat. Here are examples of what I mean when I say that debate is done and that the left has simply implemented its agenda as public policies and social acceptance.

EXAMPLE 1: Murder Is a Virtue—Life Can Even Be Morally Wrong:

We aren’t really debating abortion and other murder in our society. We have legalized abortion and turned it into “Respectable Baby Killing.” And we’re legitimizing and legalizing other murders too. Thus, we write books about how we killed our parents. And we will defend these murders at all costs.

Remember how, earlier in 2011, the nation demonized Republicans and those who were willing to shut down the government in order to save the nation from death by bankruptcy? That was simply calculated political rhetoric that leftists knew would cause the Republicans to cave and give them what they wanted. Of course, when it comes to shutting down the government in order to preserve abortion, leftists have no problems in doing so. In fact, the left is willing to shut down the government and destroy everything if it means protecting abortion. Hence, we get stories like the following:
Indeed, those who murder and promote murder are “heroes” and praised in our society; the only thing we’re “debating” with regards to legalized murder is whether we should tolerate “backwards” people who oppose it. And while conservatives and other non-leftists “debate” whether we should be silenced, the left has moved on to implementing new public policy and social change on the matter: now our nation believes that life itself can be morally wrong. Thus, we have established in law that there is such a thing as a “wrongful birth,” and those who are “victims” of wrongful births are entitled to millions of dollars in compensation. (See, “Couple who would have aborted disabled son awarded $4.5 million for ‘wrongful birth’,” for example)

EXAMPLE 2: Using the Lie of Global Warming to Implement Worldwide Communism Is a Virtue:

Global warming / global climate change is a lie—a hoax created in order to redistribute wealth and implement global communism. Yet the left moves forward with this and denounces those of us who point out the truth. 

And not only have conservatives and non-leftists refused to put an end to the nonsense and reverse all the communism implemented by it, the left is moving yet further ahead with even worse tyranny. Thus, by January 2012, the 100-watt light bulb will become illegal to sell. We have made light bulbs political—it now is “controversial” to support incandescent light bulbs. I cannot put into words the full stupidity of this. And yet conservatives and other non-leftists still don’t have the guts to reverse this regression brought on by the self-proclaimed progressives.

EXAMPLE 3: Health Care Is a Right:

We have universal health care—the government now decides who lives, who dies, and who gets what. You can dispute what I just wrote and claim that it hasn’t been fully implemented yet but the fact remains that the left has made their agenda into official policy. And leftists did it by saying that, “We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it.” This once again shows that while conservatives and other non-leftists are “debating” as to why universal health care (better termed, universal life control) is wrong, the left laughs at us all the while successfully focusing on moving public policy and social acceptance beyond this.

EXAMPLE 4: Immorality Is Morality; Morality Is Immorality:

The “debate” over sodomy is over. We have implemented it in our Armed Forces and we have made it a top public policy priority that is promoted at the highest levels of our government.

EXAMPLE 5: Law Is Immoral; Lawlessness Is Moral:

I am a “bigoted, xenophobic” pariah worthy of condemnation for saying that I want the law followed, and millions of illegal aliens deported from my nation. Yet Jose Antonio Vargas can boast of breaking the law and being an illegal alien and still not be deported for it. Our government outright ignores the law and national security. Worse still, our government outright boasts of breaking the law to advance the leftist agenda—to make it public policy. In the words of Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.):

“We had a president of the United States that recently was speaking at National Council of La Raza who said during his speech, ‘There are those who simply wish me to bypass Congress when it comes to immigration,’ and many in the audience clapped, saying, ‘Yup, bypass Congress…’” Gutierrez told the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute (CHCI) conference on Monday.

“He (Obama) said, ‘But I can’t bypass Congress,’ and people in the audience said, ‘Yes you can,’ and you want to know something? They were right -- he could and he did, and I want to thank the President of the United States, and I want to thank all of those that work at the White House for issuing new guidance when it comes to deportations,” Gutierrez added.

See? We’re not debating the issue of the illegal alien invasion and occupation, or law and order; the left is implementing its lawlessness as public policy. Yet conservatives and other non-leftists refuse to do the same.

Ryan James Girdusky wrote, “If President Obama Can Ignore Immigration Law, President Bachmann Can Ignore Abortion Law,” on August 26, 2011 at Townhall. And while his column title is exactly right, who actually thinks a President Bachmann or any other non-leftist president would indeed do that? They wouldn’t . . . because conservatives and other non-leftists don’t ever move our agenda forward or make it public policy; we simply “debate” it.

EXAMPLE 6: Food Is Evil; Raping and Mutilating Children Is a Virtue:

Leftists have been so successful with distracting conservatives and other non-leftists with the idea of “debate” while they change society that they have implemented their agenda on food, sex, and children as public policy and social acceptance.

After I read, “Recommended New York sex ed site offers middleschoolers tips on eating feces, bestiality, fetishes,” from LifeSiteNews, I realized that we have crossed the point-of-no-return. We now live in a society where we believe that we can’t stop children from having sex—that we can’t even stop them from eating feces—and therefore we must provide them with “resources” so they know what they are doing and so they can know the “safest” practices. We don’t necessarily recommend eating feces, of course (why, that would just be extreme) but we have surrendered on the idea that we can prevent it. At the same time, our nation is on a war to end “obesity” and to keep kids (and everyone else) from eating the “wrong” foods. In other words, while we don’t believe that we can stop kids from having sex and eating feces, we believe that we can eventually stop them from eating too much salt, or drinking chocolate milk at all, or from eating Happy Meals entirely—because these are all such dangerous things that we MUST and CAN eliminate them.

And perhaps nothing better defines the wickedness of where the American People now are than the fact that the same government that will punish you for spanking your children and take your children away from you because they are too fat, will at the same time allow you to keep your children if you begin injecting your son with male-blocking hormones and allow him to “live as a girl,” all the while you look forward to the day when you can inject him with female hormones and cut off his perfectly healthy genitals to replace them with a pseudo-vagina so that you can complete your mutilation of him. Indeed, not only will the government not take your children away from you for doing this, it will actively encourage you to do this.

I’ll let the reader look through the below links on his own for more information on the depth of the leftist takeover of our society. The only caveat I’ll add is that while the inclusion of the B4U-Act conference may seem like it is not an action that advances the leftist agenda but is instead a debate on whether we should legalize the rape of children, it actually is an action that moves the leftist agenda forward. The B4U-Act conference was not a debate on whether or not the rape of children should be legal; rather it was a conference on the best way to move forward the process of normalizing society to the idea of raping children so that the legalization process can follow . . . just as was done with society and sodomy.
And So It Goes:

And so it goes.

The left has so subverted the Right and taken control of the national mindset that conservatives and other non-leftists now truly believe that leftists have a right to advance their hatred with whatever means they choose. Conservatives and other non-leftists have bought into the argument that the left’s extremism is mainstream. Meanwhile, conservatives and other non-leftists believe that conservatives who promote a truly conservative viewpoint in “debate” are “extremists.” And a conservative who actually tries to implement his beliefs as public policy and social acceptance is simply someone who needs excluded from polite society.

Hence, we now live in a world where we believe that it is okay for the left’s legalized murder (abortion, euthanasia, etc.) and that it is even okay (or at least, “debatable”) for leftists to illegally murder (Ayers, Mumia abu Jamal, etc.). At the same time, we absolutely forbid anyone on the Right to sympathize with those who abort abortionists or who “murder” enemies on the battlefields of war. And we wouldn’t even think of allowing anyone associated with the Right to suggest that we should promote the idea of legalizing the abortion of aborters and other leftists. After all, if we did, we would be guilty of being “extreme” and guilty of “driving away moderates” to the Democratic Party, communists, anarchists, and other now mainstream American ideology.
This Is a Fight and It’s Long Past Time to Acknowledge It:

Leftists will never change their minds—they will settle for nothing less than our destruction and hell on earth.

But I don’t want to continue whining about the left’s takeover of America. I’m as tired as everyone else with conservatives and other non-leftists whining about it. Let’s just act. Every attack of the left needs to be met with (at minimum) an equally hard attack and preferably an even harder attack—and there should be no apologies.

I’m also tired of the cries to “end the divisiveness” and that “we need to come together on common ground.” 

Nonsense. Where is the honor in ending divisiveness with evil? Where is the honor in coming together on “common ground” with evil? I want divisiveness with evil. And let’s stop being distracted by “debate” with the left as they turn their agenda into public policy and social acceptance.

It is time for us to play by the same rules. Therefore, from now on, I will do so.

Foreign and Domestic Intelligencer

Posted by at