Occupy Raleigh – Day 2

Bo Chagnon is 65 years old and was one of the people arrested at the Capitol in Raleigh.


Since Mr. Chagnon was arrested, he understands that if he gets arrested again for trespassing on state property, he will face additional charges for disobeying a court order. I will attest that the occupiers that I talked with today were peaceful and willing to debate issues.

There were about 60 occupiers on the sidewalk in front of the Capitol on Day 2. The barricades were in place around the Capitol to keep them out.

David DeGerolamo

Plugin by: PHP Freelancer
This entry was posted in Civil Unrest, Editorial and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
1 Comment
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
10 years ago

Mr Chagnon’s position and argument, to “stand against power”is, on first view, quite compelling. He articulates a calm and reasoned case for his civil disobedience.

As a confessed supporter of Occupy Raleigh Mr Chagnon is careful, however, to avoid any reference to the specific messages and demands of the “Occupiers”.

If he were to refer directly to the Occupiers’ demand for “economic justice” (on the banner behind the podium), such reference would cleanly dissolve his claim that the Occupy movement “…is similar to all other movements we’ve seen in this country…”.

The commonality of action about which he speaks, “standing up to power”, is but a tactic to achieve an end. Many groups of people may execute similar tactics, yet share no common purpose or desired outcome.

As a direct example from yesterday: I attended the Occupation in order to refute the participants, and I elected to use a tactic from Saul Alinsky’s “Rules For Radicals”.

I intentionally created a highly polarizing message. I demonized one of the extremes. I argued against the demon to drive the argument toward the desired pole. I used their preferred tactic yet shared no common purpose or desired outcome with my antagonists.

I agree with Mr Chagnon that rights must be asserted by individuals and never requested or pleaded from governments. However, he and the Occupiers are arguing for “positive rights” (things which must be provided by others) and I argue for “negative rights” (the freedom from their desired coercion).

The Occupy movement may be labeled the “Tea Party of the Left” but the comparison is entirely false. The Tea Party seeks a restoration of the ‘charter of negative liberties’ embraced in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution… freedom from encroachment.

The Occupy movement seeks an artificial relief from the realities of life… they seek freedom from responsibility, from the need to provide for their own well being and happiness. The Occupiers mantra is “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”

Mr Chagnon has a firm grasp on the tactics needed to confront oppression. He now needs to develop the necessary moral code that will ensure that he does not become next oppressor.

Perhaps with time and patience from us he will eventually be able to recite, with his great eloquence, the following statement:

“I swear, by my life and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another to live for mine.”