Printed Editions



Download our Printed Editions
Volume: 1.1 1.2

Wednesday, October 19, 2011

A Brief Response to "Why Occupy Wall Street Will Not Succeed"


The name calling that we are perpetuating in this forum attests to just how widespread capitalist cultural control extends and how it fragments our society into subgroups till the point when we loose our collective power.
What is interesting about Occupy Wall Street? It is a call for an open dialogue, and not just one centered on petty quips and debates over the best forms of political reform, but about asking ourselves what has capitalism culturally instilled in us as “proper dialogue” and “acceptable activism”.
It is first and foremost about inclusivity. Capitalist society assures that those in power stay in power by fragmenting knowledge and society into sub-disciplines and subcultures. This “movement”, as no other term has arisen to name it, is about breaking down the walls of our public rhetoric, of what we accept as “rational” thought so that we can benefit from the extensive wealth of knowledge that humanity has generated, but, since the rise of the post-renaissance, modern era, has been subjugated into culturally reproduced and therefore legitimized knowledge, and culturally marginalized and therefore illegitimate or “radical” knowledge.
        Allowing the cultural controls of capitalist society to exclude necessary fields in human knowledge from public conversation is as much of a tool of oppression as militarism or economic exploitation. In fact, it may be even more dangerous as it is not readily evident to most people who are the most effected by it. Disciplines of philosophy, idealism, utopianism, original Marxism, anarchism, communalism, syndicalism, primitivism, modernism, quantum theory, psychology, evolutionary theory, eastern thought, to touch only on the surface level, have all been excluded from the discourse by those who turn the wheels of our globalizing world, and the reaffirmation that these fields of knowledge are somehow separate. They have been excluded from the conversation so that classical economics and the rationalization of irrationalites become the dominant tools of rhetoric; anyone not versed in this conversation is immediately excluded as a radical (another example of a term that has been used to illegitimate large sects of our society), or not holding the institutionally certified credentials to be a validated participant. The point is that these are not “radical thoughts” (in the negative definition that is connoted by that label).
There have been systemic changes in history, collapses of empires, experiments with other systems that have failed, and there is something to be learned from them all. It may seem like an impossibility standing up against such a large web of systemic control, but that is another mechanism that is intrinsic to capitalist cultural control that prevents any challenge to the system from generating any momentum. Just because capitalist society has perpetuated itself to a state of dominance does not validate it, and what we are learning is that there are other, natural systems that are not compatible with this system and if things don’t drastically change shit will hit the fan. 
Why does Occupy Wall Street deserve attention? In many ways it is a hope that there can be a new form of revolution. I’m not arguing that Occupy Wall Street is a revolution waiting to happen, rather that it is merely an instance in what we need to envision as a multitude of smaller global revolutions that are interconnected. It doesn’t matter how small one individual explosion of discontent is, but instead how globalization can be used as a tool to fight. We can pat ourselves on the back for the end of slavery, the civil rights movement, womens' rights movement, public discourse on gender, and all the other “victories” within the system, but within all these the tiniest bit of liberty is won -- just enough so that a real revolution doesn’t take place.
Capitalism is complex. It involves intricate systems of cultural control that are often imperceptible, but to anthropomorphize it for a moment, it knows what it’s doing. It will keep handing us tiny advances to placate our temporal frustration as we bicker with one another about who has a right to speak out against it. Rights aside, we all need to put aside our narcissistic viewpoint and realize we are making one another into enemies.
            Here is my take away message for this Internet forum in a few more than a few sentences. This argument, this polarization, this antagonism, this subjugation, this fragmentation, this selfish want to be the one to bring about change is exactly what capitalism utilizes as a tool to keep itself alive. We are all guilty of it, but we shouldn’t feel guilty about it. It is part of an oppressive system. As easy as it is to throw mud at each other, pick and choose who has a right to speak out against an exploitative system, who really and truly is the most marginalized, who has slept a night in the gutter, we have to fight against this tendency because that is exactly what leads to paralysis. It’s hard and it takes the will of every individual to push against the selfish tendency to want to BE the bearer of real change, when really we should ALLOW for change to happen regardless of an individual hand ushering it in. Life is circumstantial and we shouldn’t ostracize one another for that, but rather recognize that our anger stems from the same focal point.
            Let’s allow ourselves to learn from one another and not just speak so we can feel better about asserting our viewpoint as right. Students perpetuated this conversation, and let’s remember that we have knowledge that is constructive and we can educate one another outside of institutions, not because we are Students (or those who are legitimized by the system as the holders of knowledge), but because we are questioning our systems and ourselves. It’s not about being the first to recognize it, or the most vocal, or the right one, but about not working with capitalist control to smother any attempt at real, systemic change.

Peter

Tuesday, October 18, 2011

Why Occupy Wall Street Will Not Succeed

The Occupy Wall Street movement seeks to protest the greed of the one percent. In the words of Professor Cornel West (one of the protestors), “We are tired of seeing Wall Street’s greed getting rewarded…anytime they make any profits they are privatized, and when losses come up the government decides to socialize them (through the bailouts)…Obama has failed working class America.”

We believe that the Occupy Wall Street is a movement that has grown due to the crème de la crème of the United States. It is rumored that George Soros, Forbes richest man having made his money from Wall Street, funded Occupy Wall Street in its preliminary stages. Most protestors, namely the ones ‘in it for the long haul,’ are direct beneficiaries of the corporate forces that Occupy Wall Street condemns. The Movement is thus hypocritical because they are protesting against the hand that feeds them; it goes without saying that most of these protestors going to Occupy Wall Street, much like Occupy Middlebury, are ‘trustafarians’ who have little to no first hand experience of what they preach. Rather, it is merely a call for solidarity that is fun and exciting to attend and worth experiencing.

The truly overlooked by corporate forces should to be the protesters. Where are they? They are most likely working their nine to five jobs, making ends meet and, unless they sacrifice their vacation time used for loved ones, family and friends, they will have no time for around the clock protesting. A recent article comparing the Slutwalk to Occupy Wall Street put it perfectly, “To get people to join your movement, they need to see themselves reflected in it.” This idea brings us to our main argument: The movement is taking away agency from the people who really need to be protesting and as a result, perpetuating marginalization and powerlessness. Mahatma Gandhi was once asked by a well-meaning British citizen what he could do to help the Indian independence movement. Gandhi asserted, “Nothing!” He understood for independence to be realized for the Indian people they needed to do it for themselves. This same critique is applied to the “in it for the long haul” protesters who are benefactors of the system they criticize.

Have you actually explored the site we are the 99 percent? Those who have been subject to the greed of the few, upload a picture of themselves, with a hand-written statement about what they have suffered and must make sure they write, “I am the 99 percent.” The protestors are perpetuating what Zizek refers to as ‘cultural capitalism,’ explained with a brief story, “in the morning he grabs the money and in the afternoon he gives half of the money back to charity.” In the case of the protesters, they have “grabbed” the leisure of time and money that in turn they put towards a protest. Occupy Wall Street is a pat on the back for those attending and supporting.

This façade of a people’s movement might actually hinder the potential for a successful movement consisting of the proletariat toppling the corporate greed that is controlling their immediate lives. The Declaration of Occupy Wall Street cites, “We write so that all people who feel wronged by the corporate forces of the world can know that we are your allies.” Occupy Wall Street protesters are indeed allies and are not all people. Banality of evil can help us explain where to go from here. We are all accountable. We have all used the oppression of marginalized groups in order to achieve success. We must acknowledge our role in the white noise we created and use our privileges accordingly. 

Co-written by Janet Rodrigues ’12 and Mugo Mutothori ‘12

Wednesday, October 12, 2011

One Dean's View

Thought this was worth sharing. Read the blog post then take a look through the comments. I think you will find that Ms. Rodrigues does in fact get a little help from her friends.

http://blogs.middlebury.edu/onedeansview/2011/10/11/with-a-little-help-from-my-friends/

Tuesday, October 11, 2011

This Week On Campus

The following is a list of scheduled events on the Middlebury College campus this week.

As of this posting, we at the The Gadfly do not explicitly endorse any of these events, but encourage our readers, contributors and fellow inquisitives to attend, in order to better inform one's own position and perspective. All events engage with issues that are of major concern to The Gadfly collective, and are ordered strictly by chronology.

Enjoy your week- perhaps "the bubble" could be in trouble!
- The Gadfly



Wednesday Oct 12th

  • "Black Male Incarceration."
    Prof Keith Reeves (Swarthmore)

    @ 4:30pm in the Robert A. Jones House (RAJ conference room)

  • Corporate Exploitation Film:
    "Crude: The Real Price of Oil"

    @ 7:15pm in Bihall 104

Thursday Oct 13th

  • ES Colloquium Series "The Problem of Proximity: Black Male Incarceration and the Urban Environment."
    Prof Keith Reeves (Swarthmore)

    @ 12:30pm in The Orchard at Hillcrest

  • VT Migrant Farmworker Solidarity Project:
    Danillo Lopez visit

    @ 4:30pm in The Orchard at Hillcrest

  • Student Solidarity March
    in Support of Occupy Wall Street

    @ 4:30pm outside the Davis Library
    (march to be followed by a "General Assembly" at the Gifford Amphitheater)

Friday Oct 14th

  • Occupy Wall Street Panel (Professors and Students followed by an open forum) @ 12:00pm in the Robert A Jones House (RAJ conference room)

Saturday Oct 15th

  • ***Careers on Wall Street Parent's Weekend Panel***

    Come one, come all.
    We know you have many questions to ask!

    We are required to ask that everyone behave in a "civilized manner." (read as you wish)

    @ 9:30-10:30 am in the Robert A Jones House (RAJ conference room)

Video: CBC's Kevin O'Leary gets schooled on #Occupy Wall Street movement by Chris Hedges

http://rabble.ca/rabbletv/program-guide/2011/10/best-net/cbcs-kevin-oleary-gets-schooled-occupy-movement-chris-hedges

this gave us a good laugh.

Thursday, September 29, 2011

a critique of study abroad + my extraordinary everyday

[ This is an essay written for a sociology of tourism class. i've decided to post it here because it expresses some unorthodox ideas about travel, in particular as it pertains to midd students. i encourage others to likewise consider posting schoolwork to the blog. ]

            i attend a college where i am a minority because (1) i do not study a foreign language, and (2) i choose not to study abroad. This raises several questions. Why does a school like Middlebury College place such emphasis on its language and study abroad programs? What objectives does it believe these avenues access? Where do they actually arrive? What is my relation to these directions and destinations as someone who digresses from the trodden path? Why do i digress?

            In seeking to understand the act and rhetoric of studying abroad, it is helpful to draw on the field of tourism studies to investigate how modern humans relate to travel. For Dean MacCannell, the tourist industry represents the proffered solution to modern feelings of alienation (from work, from family, from community, from self) which run rampant in urban and suburban populations. By engaging with the authenticity of others, we are supposedly afforded a dose of reality that makes the unreality of the everyday life tolerable (paradoxically). John Urry’s approach to tourism pursues a similar idea, where modern beings make a temporary departure from the “regulated spheres” of routine life to “engage with a set of stimuli that contrast with the everyday and mundane”. To these understandings Nelson H.H. Graburn adds the dimension of rituality, which invokes discourse about the sacred and profane and about the structure surrounding ritual activities. Moreover, Erik Cohen complicates things by pointing out that escape from alienation is not necessarily the root of all tourist activities, but that a more nuanced “interest in or appreciation of that which is different” spurs variations of “movement away from the spiritual, cultural or even religious centre of one’s ‘world’ into its periphery, towards the centres of other societies”. 

            Since Middlebury has made no official statement regarding the purpose of its study abroad programs, i turn instead to the college’s mission statement under the assumption that study abroad operates along similar guidelines. From the mission statement:

“We strive to engage students' capacity for rigorous analysis and independent thought within a wide range of disciplines and endeavors, and to cultivate the intellectual, creative, physical, ethical, and social qualities essential for leadership in a rapidly changing global community. Through the pursuit of knowledge unconstrained by national or disciplinary boundaries, students who come to Middlebury learn to engage the world.”
What we can glean from this is that Middlebury exports its students to build this cherished “knowledge unconstrained by national boundaries” for the production of global community leaders. The emphasis here is on intellectual and professional cultivation. To expedite these processes the college implements a standard of language proficiency as the touchstone for immersion. By putting students in close touch with unfamiliar cultures, the college aims to foster the tenets of “universal sympathy” and “international responsibility” that underlie to global citizenship. 

Tuesday, September 27, 2011

"Cops Beat Up People Because They Know They Can Get Away With It "

Mainstream media (MSNBC) decrying police conduct at #OccupyWallSt


Cops are never your friends. 
They are not looking out for you. 
It has always been this way. It will always be this way.
Never trust a cop.

Thursday, September 22, 2011

First Post for a New Fall Season: An Irony for our Times

"Islam's borders are bloody and so are its innards."
-Samuel Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order


Contemporary critical scholarship has brought more than enough evidence/analysis to fundamentally reject Huntington's racist apologism for post- Cold War neocolonialism. In an ironic twist to his controversial 1993 thesis on championing U.S and European capital interests, two events took place tonight which once again call this "waspy" Harvard neocon to light.


Tonight at 11:08pm EDT Troy Anthony Davis, a black male from Savannah who by any objective measure was wrongfully convicted of murder, was put to death by the The Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles. 
Additional info please see Amnesty International Coverage
plus see the Atlanta IWW Solidarity Statement 
Just hours later, after responding to intense pressure from President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Iranian Judiciary released two Cal Berkley activists who had been imprisoned on suspicion of spying, in another political move, this time by Iran in which two lives were spared. 
Additional Info at Democracy Now!
These two white college graduates can now rejoin their families and enter into a world where they will come to be considered expert witnessed on Iran's politics. The latter observation is in no way dismissive of their innocence or judgmental of their intensions, but rather illustrative of contemporary white privilege. The truth is that Troy Davis was put to death either to make someone's life in Georgia a bit easier or to let the Supreme Court Justices in D.C get their beauty sleep.



On Samuel Huntington's thesis:


"A reductive and vulgar notion," an illustration "of the purest invidious racism, a sort of parody of Hitlerian science directed today against Arabs and Muslims"

-Professor Edward Said



"For these reasons we have been forced to the solution outlined by Professor Huntington: to crush the people’s war, we must eliminate the people."

-Professor Noam Chomsky


Despite these powerful sentiments from two respectable critical thinkers, we must ask ourselves these questions: Do we even still need the academic criticism to recognize the farce that is Huntington's thesis? Of course you'll undoubtably read it against Fukuyama in any intro IR/PSCI class at Middlebury. What a spectrum. Has it really stooped to this? Can a cursory reading of corporate media headlines provide the obvious insight that you may not even get with your education at Middlebury? Disagree? Fire away in the comments...


Friday, July 8, 2011

We were reviewed

over at One Minute Zine Reviews.

"Students at Middlebury have been thinking about big issues and it shows in the articulate and passionate writing within The Gadfly. This issue ranges from musings on the nature of corporate educational control to food insecurities, dealing with the cops, resisting labels and questioning capitalism. I’m older and jaded and have wondered: where are the alternative thinkers on campuses today? They’re reading The Gadfly."

Check it out!