Do we live in a corporate police state?

[FayeforCure]

John Stoehr.

Editor, New Haven Advocate; Lecturer, Yale University
Occupy Wall Street Evicted by $174.5 Million Subsidized Firm

Posted: 11/17/11 08:54 AM ET


Do we live in a corporate police state?

By that, I mean are we seeing the privatization of public authority (police, courts) and the privileging of property and capital in the prosecution of the law? So much suggests lately that our representative government doesn't represent the 99 percent. We vote. We pay taxes. We sacrifice. But to what end?

By camping in a park near Wall Street, a band of intrepid Americans challenged the status quo and demanded change. They sparked an international movement and would have continued if New York cops -- in riot gear and with batons and rifles -- hadn't torn down the encampment and arrested dozens.

A judge ruled the same day that protesters could return. They did so by the hundreds. The ruling also posed a challenge to Mayor Michael Bloomberg. Bloomberg, a billionaire, admitted his order came after Brookfield Properties, the park's owner, asked the mayor to end the protests. If the police were not executing state power in the name of the people, in whose name were they doing it?

Bloomberg's order followed a series of police actions. Newspapers in Portland, Oakland, Salt Lake City, Chapel Hill and elsewhere ran photographs in recent days of non-violent protesters squaring off against military-like police forces. In fact, New York followed 18 other cities in a coordinated effort to push Occupationists out of public parks around the country.

Yet the clearing of Zuccotti Park is different, because Zuccotti Park is different. While most parks are public, this one is privately owned. Its owner is one of America's largest commercial real estate firms. Brookfield Properties owns lots of property in lower Manhattan -- and its status among corporate "citizens" is enviable.

When taxes subsidize public properties like parks, the burden is shared. So are the rewards. In some cases, though, taxes subsidize private properties. The burden is shared but the rewards are monopolized. Such is the case with Brookfield and its tenants. In recent years, they have taken more than $174.5 million in public subsidies, according to a think tank that analyzes economic development.

Called Good Jobs First, the nonprofit organization released a report last month about Brookfield's subsidies and much more: "The subsidy figures don't tell the whole story," wrote analyst Bettina Damiani. "There are other economic development programs that Lower Manhattan firms benefit from, but how much is earmarked for a particular firm isn't publicly known."

You don't hear this on conservative talk radio. Protesters cost taxpayers, they say while overlooking the part about the enormous cost of corporate welfare. The difference, of course, is clear to anyone paying attention: In the first, you effectively underwrite your own right to assemble and protest. You win. In the second, you underwrite a private firm's balance sheets. You lose.

What's the takeaway? We live in a country of principles like civil liberties and the rule of law. Power and authority aren't owned. They are shared. But the evacuation of Zuccotti Park and others around the country casts a sickening pall over such ideals. Worse are the media images of the past week, especially in New York where it all began, and what they might suggest.

Cops dressed like soldiers in body armor, face shields and helmets deploying excessive force against peaceful protesters. Such images call to mind dictatorships, not the land of the free.

Perhaps we are merely seeing a duality that has been there all along. On the one hand are the American dreamers hoping for a renewed promise of opportunity, equality and justice. On the other are the guardians of the corporate state accountable no one but the wealthy and powerful.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-stoehr/occupy-wall-street-evicted_b_1098642.html

It reminds me of when I ran for office..........reporters would actually write that I had some pie in the sky ideas.

As if aspiring to do better for our society is deemed impossible or even unwanted.

[acme54321]

Yeah!  My neighbor got a cash for clunkers tax subsidy on his new car!!  Where are the keys?  My turn to drive!!

[NotNow]

This kind of "journalism" just accelerates the loss of what little credibility the "Occupy' movement had left. 

[Bridges]

This kind of "journalism" just accelerates the loss of what little credibility the "Occupy' movement had left. 

I don't understand what you mean by that?  Do you not agree that this is an issue?  That the park, while privately owned, is publicly subsidized?  And yet, that somehow makes it not public? 

I think this is one of the main points of Occupy, we continue to socialize the risks and the costs while privatizing the profits and the benefits.

[acme54321]

How is it any different than someone getting a tax return, new homebuyers credit, cash 4 clunkers refund, etc?

[NotNow]

This kind of "journalism" just accelerates the loss of what little credibility the "Occupy' movement had left. 

I don't understand what you mean by that?  Do you not agree that this is an issue?  That the park, while privately owned, is publicly subsidized?  And yet, that somehow makes it not public? 

I think this is one of the main points of Occupy, we continue to socialize the risks and the costs while privatizing the profits and the benefits.

No, I don't think it is an issue.  The park was created because the City of New York created a program to encourage such privately owned public spaces.  I do not know of any subsidy paid to Brookfield Properties for this park, do you?  If it were a public park, then it would be subject to curfews like all of the other public parks in NYC.  In this case, an owner of private property appears to have tried to cooperate with the leaders of the demonstration, but in the end lack of control over violence, crime, sanitation, and drug use led the owners to ask the demonstrators to leave.  When they refuse, they then become trespassers.  Seems pretty simple to me.

The article fails to mention that the judges order to allow the protesters back was overturned by the NY Supreme Court.  That is why OWS must now follow the rules of the park.

Brookfield Properties is a large real estate company that receives government "subsidies" because they are offered by those governments who want companies to do certain things.  If the citizens of a jurisdiction do not want such "subsidies", then they are free to elect representatives who agree with them.

As for "militarized" Police, posters are not familiar with crowd control protective equipment.  It is not "militarized" at all.  Such gear is commonly similar to hockey or football protective clothing, and protects Officers from the thrown objects that are common at such events.   The vehicles pictured are old military armored vehicles, but they are "de-miled" and don't carry crew served weapons or any other "destructive" devices.  Such vehicles ( and modern armored LE vehicles) are used when confronting a barricaded armed adversary or similar incidents.  Unlike the military, law enforcement can not simply call in artillery.  Such vehicles protect Officers from gunfire while saving victims or transporting teams to the barricaded building. 

I would also warn posters against getting too excited about short youtube videos.  When events are viewed without context, without showing what happened previously or through the end of an event, and are viewed in the very narrow context of a camera then perception often has very little to do with what actually happens.  I realize that this is not a "police friendly" group, but I would encourage posters to do a little research and see if other views or videos are available for some of the commonly quoted events.

[ben says]

John Stoehr.

Editor, New Haven Advocate; Lecturer, Yale University
Occupy Wall Street Evicted by $174.5 Million Subsidized Firm

Posted: 11/17/11 08:54 AM ET


Do we live in a corporate police state?

By that, I mean are we seeing the privatization of public authority (police, courts) and the privileging of property and capital in the prosecution of the law? So much suggests lately that our representative government doesn't represent the 99 percent. We vote. We pay taxes. We sacrifice. But to what end?

By camping in a park near Wall Street, a band of intrepid Americans challenged the status quo and demanded change. They sparked an international movement and would have continued if New York cops -- in riot gear and with batons and rifles -- hadn't torn down the encampment and arrested dozens.

A judge ruled the same day that protesters could return. They did so by the hundreds. The ruling also posed a challenge to Mayor Michael Bloomberg. Bloomberg, a billionaire, admitted his order came after Brookfield Properties, the park's owner, asked the mayor to end the protests. If the police were not executing state power in the name of the people, in whose name were they doing it?

Bloomberg's order followed a series of police actions. Newspapers in Portland, Oakland, Salt Lake City, Chapel Hill and elsewhere ran photographs in recent days of non-violent protesters squaring off against military-like police forces. In fact, New York followed 18 other cities in a coordinated effort to push Occupationists out of public parks around the country.

Yet the clearing of Zuccotti Park is different, because Zuccotti Park is different. While most parks are public, this one is privately owned. Its owner is one of America's largest commercial real estate firms. Brookfield Properties owns lots of property in lower Manhattan -- and its status among corporate "citizens" is enviable.

When taxes subsidize public properties like parks, the burden is shared. So are the rewards. In some cases, though, taxes subsidize private properties. The burden is shared but the rewards are monopolized. Such is the case with Brookfield and its tenants. In recent years, they have taken more than $174.5 million in public subsidies, according to a think tank that analyzes economic development.

Called Good Jobs First, the nonprofit organization released a report last month about Brookfield's subsidies and much more: "The subsidy figures don't tell the whole story," wrote analyst Bettina Damiani. "There are other economic development programs that Lower Manhattan firms benefit from, but how much is earmarked for a particular firm isn't publicly known."

You don't hear this on conservative talk radio. Protesters cost taxpayers, they say while overlooking the part about the enormous cost of corporate welfare. The difference, of course, is clear to anyone paying attention: In the first, you effectively underwrite your own right to assemble and protest. You win. In the second, you underwrite a private firm's balance sheets. You lose.

What's the takeaway? We live in a country of principles like civil liberties and the rule of law. Power and authority aren't owned. They are shared. But the evacuation of Zuccotti Park and others around the country casts a sickening pall over such ideals. Worse are the media images of the past week, especially in New York where it all began, and what they might suggest.

Cops dressed like soldiers in body armor, face shields and helmets deploying excessive force against peaceful protesters. Such images call to mind dictatorships, not the land of the free.

Perhaps we are merely seeing a duality that has been there all along. On the one hand are the American dreamers hoping for a renewed promise of opportunity, equality and justice. On the other are the guardians of the corporate state accountable no one but the wealthy and powerful.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-stoehr/occupy-wall-street-evicted_b_1098642.html

It reminds me of when I ran for office..........reporters would actually write that I had some pie in the sky ideas.

As if aspiring to do better for our society is deemed impossible or even unwanted.

Completely agree. Glad I'm not the only raging leftist on this site anymore.

[NotNow]

Uninformed and yelling obscenities.  Your response is appropriate for the subject. 

"Serving the public" has nothing to do with allowing felony crime and unsanitary condition.  The right of the OWS to assemble is not in question. 

Since you appear to have very little understanding of the Constitution, I will continue to attempt to help you with what the document states.

[Duuuvalboy]

^^^SDFU Bih.. You just a brainwash individual.. If you can see whats really going on then you mind as hell kill yoself fool.

[acme54321]

^^^SDFU Bih.. You just a brainwash individual.. If you can see whats really going on then you mind as hell kill yoself fool.

  Stop embarrassing yourself "Bih"

[buckethead]

Don't watch this!

[acme54321]

Don't watch this!

Nice.  I guess it's playing out just like Southpark predicted 

[acme54321]

^^^SDFU Bih.. You just a brainwash individual.. If you can see whats really going on then you mind as hell kill yoself fool.

Duvalboy, just to reaffirm.  You are a new poster here, and our rules require that you observe rules of civility.  Posts saying 'fuck you' to other posters get deleted, as do personal attacks.

Im going to leave this post up, and ask you.  What do you think is really going on?  Id be genuinely fascinated to know.

I'd also like to know, since in his post he claims "If you can see whats really going on then you mind as hell kill yoself fool"  (Translated to: If you can see whats really going on, you might as well kill yourself).  By posting that he implies that he can see what is really going on, but hasn't killed himself.  What's the deal?

[buckethead]

It seems we have a troll.

(with apologies to our beloved Bridge Troll)

[BridgeTroll]

Apology accepted...