E-mail
PrintTo the Editor:
Regarding the front page photo with "City Evicts Occupy COMO from its camp" (Nov. 23), I notice that a stylish, young, middle- to upper-class woman is holding a sign that reads, "The only solution is REVOLUTION."
Had I been there, I might have asked her: "Are you willing then, to be part of the killing when the revolution starts? Are you willing to take a gun, a club, a knife or rocks to drive people from their homes? Wouldn't that mess up your hair?"
It's funny how these people self-style themselves as a positive societal influence. It is a direct contradiction to the nonviolent methods encouraged by Martin Luther King Jr. and Mahatma Gandhi. Both, as we all know, changed laws, government structures and the hearts of people in the countries without using guns or knives.
My perception, therefore, of those who espouse "revolution" is that they have an internal orientation that receives pleasure from the physical, mental, emotional and spiritual pain of their desired victims.
No matter how much hair gel and designer clothing may define a person's external self, voicing a desire for revolution indicates a monstrous, violent and cruel inner self that we need to accept as reality.
I don't think we can fool ourselves anymore.
Julia Williams lives in Columbia.
Show Me the Errors 
Comments
History shows that most revolutions merely replace one whatever-ocracy with another. Usually it doesn't do anything for regular people, and often makes things worse.
DK
Those Occupy Columbia people sure did give up easily. Drove by today a few times doing business downtown and not a single person in front of city hall. I know they can not store stuff there but you would think they would still be standing there during shifts or what not.
A revolution (from the Latin revolutio, "a turn around") is a fundamental change in power or organizational structures that takes place in a relatively short period of time. Aristotle described two types of political revolution:
1 Complete change from one constitution to another
2 Modification of an existing constitution
from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution
("not a valid source")
There could never be a revolution in Columbia because there are too many LAME people per square mile in Columbia than anywhere else in the world. No pepper spray, no bully clubs, no arrests... Just a city buearocrat and a few polite police officers is all it took to remove Occupy COMO. They could probably install a death camp in Columbia for liberals and all it would get would be a letter to the editor in the Missourian.
what? the gals only got one glove...and that's a designer coat? At least she's out there-not just sitting in her home reading ...I mean looking at pictures in the paper. She's been tried w/no jury and judged to be "middle to upper CLASS"-oh, and let's assume a REVOLUTION is bloody, painful and violent
Ahem, I'd just like to say, being that I'm the girl (young woman, lady, gal, child, etc.) pictured in the photo referenced, I am both confused and a bit disgusted.
Ma'am, you're ideas of both myself and the word "Revolution" are devastatingly incorrect.
I'm beyond just poor. I have no job, I have no house to live in. I work tirelessly to help build this occupation and be a support for the people I have met that are my community; my family. (I have worked extremely difficult jobs, btw. I'm not lazy and I can guarantee that if you talked to me for ten minutes, you'd know that.)
My life has been twenty years of adversity and complete lack of hope for my future, though I've also been greatly blessed by the people whose lives I've gotten to take part of and the experiences I've had.
I am not special. Just one of many who've seen first-hand the struggle of trying to work within a failing system that is either directly or indirectly working to kill you.
My designer duds are free clothes from people who understand compassion. My haircut is one that I gave myself out of necessity, and the styling done free of charge by sweat and wind.
As far as "REVOLUTION" goes, if you are a misinformed citizen looking to the mainstream media to placate you while you're stripped of your personal liberties, it's an awfully scary word. However, if you delve a bit deeper into the etymology of the word, use some critical thinking, and use a dictionary, you will find that revolution simply means a transformation and shift of power. Peaceful revolutions have happened, and will continue to be possible through the efforts of non-violent people who seek change and have the fortitude to stand in the face of opposition and mindless authority, and offer it a Free Hug.
~Love and Puppies Playing Whimsically in a Field of Daisies~
Big Sister (Ariel)
Editor & mike mentor:
We don't need death camps in Missouri, thank you. Besides, the cremation process creates carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas.
With the exception of the county containing the city of Kirksville, most of the very northern portion of Missouri has lost population and is now underpopulated. There should be ample room to establish "re-education" camps; however, some of us seriously doubt that the potential inmates are in any way capable of re-education, or of any sort of education.
An added argument to establishing the camps in extreme northern Missouri is that transportation of those sent to the campus would be less, saving fossil fuel and carbon dioxide exhaust emissions. Most residents south of the Missouri River don't require re-education.
Because they already know how to make crystal meth.
Don't give in, don't give up. Prominent conservative strategists are already scared to death of the Occupy movement:
"I'm so scared of this anti-Wall Street effort. I'm frightened to death," said Frank Luntz, a Republican strategist and one of the nation's foremost experts on crafting the perfect political message. "They're having an impact on what the American people think of capitalism."
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/repub...
Sad their goal is to hide problems, not fix them.
It's disturbing that of all the letters to the editor you must receive, you print this one. The prejudice in the first sentence alone is appalling. That our "revolution" could be characterized in any way as violent shows a complete lack of knowledge and rigor of research. Ariel is a part of our community. All the Occupy people are OUR community. Do any of the armchair critics here care to brave the elements to influence positive, NON-VIOLENT, reform of our obviously broken government? Do any of you volunteer? I hope you all at least vote. I don't care for who. Just get out there and take part in your community.
To Corey Parks and David Sautner. If you have a problem with the public face of OccupyCoMo, maybe you should stand out there with them. Less telling others what to do and more actually DOing is what we need in this community. MORE POWER TO YOU Ariel Ceara!
While the word "revolution" is unfortunate, since it does reflect at least a certain degree of violence, and the Occupy movement is decidedly non-violent, there are a couple of statements that really bother me. Unless this woman knows this young lady, she has no factual knowledge of her socioeconomic status. Even if her parents are middle or upper middle-class, that does not mean she is. I would hate to think that some poor soul who is wearing a designer top that I got too fat for, and donated to Goodwill, is being criticized for being in the money. As for the statement "My perception, therefore, of those who espouse 'revolution' is that they have an internal orientation that receives pleasure from the physical, mental, emotional and spiritual pain of their desired victims...." I am flabbergasted. I find it amazing that so many Americans, especially of the Tea Party bent, have forgotten that unhappy British subjects violently overthrew their ruling government in order to become these United States. I certainly hope George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and all the rest did not, in fact, receive pleasure from inflicting pain on their desired victims.
One says:
"[T]hose who espouse "revolution" . . . have an internal orientation that receives pleasure from the physical, mental, emotional and spiritual pain of their desired victims. [V]oicing a desire for revolution indicates a monstrous, violent and cruel inner self that we need to accept as reality."
- Julia Williams
But another says:
"What do we mean by the Revolution? The war? That was no part of the Revolution. It was only an effect and consequence of it." "The Revolution was in the minds and hearts of the people, a change in their religious sentiments of their duties and obligations."
— John Adams
Which of the two knows more about the subject?
Michael Brooks & Co. - "Less telling others what to do and more actually DOing is what we need in this community." Could you possibly accept the information that the posts I am reading tonight are in my opinion and I'm sure that of many others, are the only thing you or any of yours have actually "Done"? I have read and heard everything about you that has been printed or spoken in my access to news media. I have asked your supporters online, "what do the occupiers want?" No response. I finally got a list of 10 (commandments?) from Boston Occupier via Missourian. Probably 1/2 would be unconstitutional. This is disconcerting because as educated as those of the movement are purported to be, those who provided those demands must know that. imo you must decide, specifically what should be done. "NON-VIOLENT, reform of our obviously broken government" won't hack it. Just for information, the Republican Congressional agenda comes much closer to correction of the problems that we all face, but you consider them the enemy as well?
@Michael Brooks: Seems you could stand to go back and read my post again as you obviously did not comprehend the first time. At no point did I say there was a problem with what they were doing or what they all stood for independently. I simply stated that "Those Occupy Columbia people sure did give up easily".
I will pass on standing along side them as I do not have the same beliefs as them. I am also a practical man and believe that voting in the same old group of people each election will never fix anything.
"Michael Brooks December 2, 2011 | 8:00 p.m.
To Corey Parks and David Sautner. If you have a problem with the public face of OccupyCoMo, maybe you should stand out there with them. Less telling others what to do and more actually DOing is what we need in this community. MORE POWER TO YOU Ariel Ceara!"
Michael Brooks wrote:
"Do any of the armchair critics here care to brave the elements to influence positive, NON-VIOLENT, reform of our obviously broken government?"
If you (or anyone) can explain to me how standing out there reforms government, I'll join you.
10 years of sign-carrying at the Broadway and Providence hasn't brought the troops home. I have other, more productive ways to blow off steam.
DK
But Mark, standing around on corners while holding up signs keeps those folks from getting into real trouble. :)
Is our federal government broken? Yes. Definitely.
In historic times, when locomotive power was provided by horses rather than internal combustion engines, when a horse broke its leg they dispatched it rather than trying to "reform" it. (Not certain what a "reformed" horse would look like, but to state W. C. Fields' perversion of a well-known adage: "You can lead a horse to drink but you cannot make it water.")