Berkeley City Council Doing Its Anti-Democracy Bit

[Urbane Guerrilla]

The Berkeley City Council, which has never officially liked the idea that foreign fascism and other obnoxiousism should perish from the Earth -- it seems their shibboleth that it's the Republicans that keep the fascist flame alive domestically, and how willfully ignorant of Republicans and Fascists is that? -- now attempts harassment of the USMC recruiting office on Shattuck Avenue by the petty gesture of reserving a parking space directly in front of the recruiting office for Code Pink to park vehicles in to further their anti-antifascism campaign. Mala fides is just rampant up there.

Et Semper Mala Fides. This is a petty hit-back at the cause of democracy, and therefore of humanity, for America's cause is humanity's cause. Our opposition is only about oppression, after all is said and done -- and what they do makes people spew.

There is one single councilmember named in one link below who comes out of this wholly without shame -- his was the dissenting vote against the 8 to 1 condemnation measure of the two measures passed against Marine Corps officer recruitment in downtown Berkeley, and I think also against the parking-space reservation, which wasn't as lopsided, passing 6-3. Seems the Marines are particularly looking for UC grads, no doubt from the sciences and engineering. Hardly the dumb high-schoolers of stereotype.

SF Chronicle

Yesterday, on FoxNews.com

Seattle blogger Karl Swenson

Jesse McKinley, for the NYT


The picture this action by the City Council paints has disturbing parallels with the first anti-Jewish law passed by the Nazis, though its scale is far smaller -- the space is reserved for Code Pink parking for four hours, one afternoon each week.

We see a group of persons, Code Pink, who are not sympathetic to the progress of democracy around the globe, or they wouldn't be carrying on the way they do, who have enough influence on an arm of government to cause them to pass a law harassing, well, persons of a different lifestyle choice than theirs. I'll leave it to the reader whether the Marine Corps constitutes a religion, remarking that like most military service, it is intensely formative. But really, where's the difference between what the pinkshirts have done and brownshirts in front of jeweler's shops going "Don't buy from Jews!"?

Whatever problem they have with Republicans breaking Fascists has never been clear to me. I don't think I'll ever understand it, being as I am enlightened these days.

I must say this action by Berkeley's council does strongly offend some deeply held beliefs of mine. How about a little impeachment and regime change in Berkeley? Hey, even a recall election or two would do nicely. So would somebody taking the parking space and fighting the ticket in court, expensively. He could doubtless get at least some pro bono legal representation. Whether the city could, I am not sure; there may be an ordinance against that.

[xoxoxoBruce]

I have to agree, after weeding out the hyperbole, The Berkeley City Council has no business targeting a legitimate, legal business for officially condoned harassment.

[glatt]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

I have to agree, after weeding out the hyperbole, The Berkeley City Council has no business targeting a legitimate, legal business for officially condoned harassment.

That weeding out takes so much effort. Too bad there isn't a Babelfish translator for UG. After parsing what his post says, I agree as well, but boy he makes it hard.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Well, glatt, do you need me to talk to you in baby talk, or would you all things considered prefer adult speech?

Quitcherbitchin; come up to my level. Nice view here.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Well, glatt, do you need me to talk to you in baby talk, or would you all things considered prefer adult speech?

Either one would be an improvement.

[Griff]

This is not outside of what democratic groups do, UG. Use big boy words from here on out. If they are being anti-freedom say so, but don't continue to re-define democracy per ancient talking points used for selling invasions. When we leave Iraq, you'll probably get to see democracy at its jackbooted best.

[ZenGum]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

Either one would be an improvement.

spot on, HM!

Cut the Latin, for a start, UG. It just makes you look like a pompous ass. Say it in English. Or Spanish, or German, or any other language actually in common usage today.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Originally Posted by ZenGum

spot on, HM!

Cut the Latin, for a start, UG. It just makes you look like a pompous ass. Say it in English. Or Spanish, or German, or any other language actually in common usage today.

Zen: no. And I have Spanish, French, and Russian and hey, I can say it in any of these. If I choose to use my admittedly scant store of Latin, look upon it as a chance to enjoy the same broad horizons I do, rather than an excuse to complain at me. I'd say that's beneath your dignity. I'll make this plain: I do not listen to such requests, deeming them both beneath me -- a request to dumb down, which is the request I forever deny -- and beneath the asker also: is he not asking to be dumber? (What???) If you don't feel like rejecting that whole I-wannabe-a-dullard frame of mind yet, I'm not doing my job of making you a better man.

In that vein, I've not often found Happy Monkey to be all that well advised anyway. I did catch him at some good thinking over in Philosophy once, and I'd like to see him at it again, but his ideology does cause him to say absurd things. He's not the only one; this is the usual fate of the posters who wrangle with me on ideological grounds. Leftism keeps you childish and in a condition of dependency -- that's the only way the left retains influence -- and you say things that sound like they're from six-year-olds, not adult humans of free estate. No thank you; I enjoy a better road.

What makes it better? Boy, that would take a long essay. A lot of that work has already been done by writers through history. Orwell inoculated me against leftism in the beginning; Heinlein was a booster shot, and then there is the kind of writing free adults can do when they're conservative: almost every month of the year in National Review. To remain left of center, you have to carefully avoid the wit and wisdom on display there.

So, reading this thread over, it looks like the usual debate-club mess-up: can't dispute the validity of the argument? See if you can piss on the guy's style. Tsk tsk. That's going to carry the day for the opposition? That's known as a losing battle, people. Make a fight when you have a case. Don't try covering that lack up with a lot of noise over peripherals or personalities. That may have fooled some... has it fooled me, do you think?

[Ibby]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Orwell inoculated me against leftism in the beginning;

What the hell?

The man was a communist! Well, okay, a socialist. He fought with the anarcho-syndicalists in Spain! The only way you could possibly use Orwell as an argument against 'leftism' is if either A.) you thought that the dystopian society he created was what he wanted, which it wasnt, or B.) you thought the society he created was good, and disagreed with him.
So either youre an idiot or a fascist, your choice.

[Undertoad]

Originally Posted by ZenGum

Cut the Latin, for a start, UG. It just makes you look like a pompous ass.

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Zen: no.

...

Originally Posted by UG

I am here in part because I can offer you fresh insight. And why would there be refusal to accept it?

Originally Posted by UG

I see you're not yet prepared to take the advice I gave you.

So... your advice is golden but when people try to advise you, you tell them in no uncertain terms that you don't accept it.

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Is there anyone reading this who'd like to speak up on UG's behalf?

And there wasn't.

There's an important point you're whiffing on here. It goes so far over your head you may need a trampoline to reach it. Ready to leap?

If the people don't like you, they won't listen to you. In fact they often come to a conclusion the opposite of your argument... merely because they take you as a horse's ass.

That's not exactly critical thinking on their behalf. The argument should be separate from the speaker. But it's true. You do your arguments a terrible disservice by serving them up on a plate with dog shit garnish. You might as well take the opposite opinion of your own, because it would lead more people to seek the alternative.

And actually, though it's not critical thinking, there may be a gem of truth in not listening to pomposity. Who is more likely to be right: the person who believes he has never been wrong, or the person who knows he has been wrong, who has been thoroughly humbled in his wrongness...?

The people find no humility in you and so they find you suspect. I think the people know what they are doing, here.

If the people here are so far beneath you that you must lecture them and not listen to them -- if that's really the case -- if you really believe that --

Then you are playing tennis in a league beneath your skill, and you should find a game that matches your skill... otherwise you are just playing to make yourself feel good, do you see that? Who would stay in a game where they are so far superior? It does your game no good.

[busterb]

UG

[deadbeater]

So Berkeley is against the troops because they reserved the parking in front of a recruiter shop to an anti-war group; isn't that what you are trying to say?
A city doesn't have to give comfort to a recruitment shop, if the majority in the city disagree with military policies.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Not giving comfort does not allow harassment.

[Grendel T. Troll]

Originally Posted by deadbeater

So Berkeley is against the troops because they reserved the parking in front of a recruiter shop to an anti-war group; isn't that what you are trying to say?
A city doesn't have to give comfort to a recruitment shop, if the majority in the city disagree with military policies.

Cool. I love it when cities think they're better than Federal agencies. If that's true, we need to cut all Federal funding from the area so they will, no longer, be contaminated by organizations that offend them.

Ahh, I love it when a bankrupt state screws with the ones that can help bail them out.....

[aimeecc]

Originally Posted by deadbeater

So Berkeley is against the troops because they reserved the parking in front of a recruiter shop to an anti-war group; isn't that what you are trying to say?
A city doesn't have to give comfort to a recruitment shop, if the majority in the city disagree with military policies.

First, its not the point of giving the parking spot to anti-war protesters and not giving comfort to recruiters. Its beyond that. They actually voted 6-3 to declare that the recruiting station "is not welcome in the city, and if recruiters choose to stay, they do so as uninvited and unwelcome intruders." Wow. Calling recruiters intruders? Un-welcoming a federal office space? That's what a recruiting station is.

Furthermore, on top of giving a parking space to an anti-war movement, they also gave them loudspeaker priveleges - something not given to the recruiters. I'm no lawyer, but I believe this to be unconstitutional. The government cannot give one group favor over another. If they give code pink a parking spot and loudspeaker privileges, they need to give the same privileges to the recruiters, then to the pro-gay-in-the-military movement, then to the pro-recruiter movement, then to the 'I don't know what I'm protesting but I'm here' movement.

Also, as the article points out, the 'don't ask, don't tell' is a federal policy, nothing the Marines control. And furthermore, active duty personnel are not authorized to state political opinions while in uniform, nor are they allowed to insult the president, nor can the campaign (in or out of uniform) for a candidate. Active duty have two choices: support Bush, or keep their mouth shut if they disagree.

The article is dead-on - the proponent of free speech is muzzling the Marines.

I actually knew a USMC Major that went to Berkeley. Great officer. Never would have guessed he went there by looking at him with a high-and-tight haircut, but exceptionally bright and very thorough.

Funnier is the fact DoD funds a lot of research at Berkeley, to include research on eyes and breast cancer.

New York Post
February 4, 2008

Muzzling The Marines

By Dale McFeatters

The city council of Berkeley, Calif., where the Free Speech Movement was born, has decided that some people deserve more free speech than others and the U.S. Marines don't deserve any at all.

For about a year, the Marines have had a recruiting station in Berkeley and the council wants it gone, voting 6-3 to declare that it "is not welcome in the city, and if recruiters choose to stay, they do so as uninvited and unwelcome intruders."

To underline the point, the council voted to support the weekly protests of Code Pink, the group of mostly women whose cringe-inducing war protests have done so much to trivialize the anti-war movement.

To help Code Pink members be even more annoying, the council reserved a parking place for them in front of the recruiting station one day a week and granted a sound permit that lets them use loudspeakers one day a week for four hours.

News accounts say that at one recent demonstration, a sparse group of protesters -- generally, it is said, there are about a dozen, not a great showing for a place like Berkeley -- shouted at the station, "Drive out the Bush regime!" Probably not a lot of thought went into that slogan since they seem to be calling for the Marines to mount a military coup, probably not what they had in mind.

The city council seems to have two objections to the Marines: They are icky militarists, which the Marines would probably not dispute; and the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy toward gays, which is unfair.

Indeed, the council is exploring ways of enforcing the city's law prohibiting sex discrimination against the Marines. The left and particularly the academic left seems unable to grasp a critical point about "don't ask, don't tell": It is not some policy the military dreamed up, but a matter of federal law, enacted by Congress in 1993 and signed by Berkeley fave Bill Clinton. Take it up with Congress, not some recruiting sergeant.

One final point: The young people of Berkeley, although perhaps less disposed to than people elsewhere, have every right to join the military -- many of them may find it a satisfying experience, even a career -- and the Berkeley city council has no business impeding them.