This is not a fight for the Mayors and Governors of the United States. Democrat Mayors in Oakland, Atlanta and Hartford have shown an inability to stay consistent with their party’s alleged position of being a party for the people. Even Independent Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg has enforced the cynical take on a classic adage “What’s in a name?” Independent was only a position taken to protect a potential presidential run that is only a memory. From the enforcement of a one hundred fifty year old city ordinance in New York City allowing masked gatherings only characterized as masquerades to take place and the very public transformation of progressive Mayor Jean Quan to the antithesis of her beliefs, as she is now a mere regressive prototype of a democrat afraid of losing her generation’s grip of political dominance.
Quan has embodied the very political practices that most presumably led her family to seek citizenship in the United States by recreating Tiananmen Square. Though this is not Japan, and honor is something rarely seen displayed in human action by American leaders and self-sacrifice in holding public office is now dominated by the mantra of self-preservation, it would be refreshing to see these men and women hold themselves accountable for getting into a fight that has no room for their egos. It is a matter of moral hazard when dealing specifically with the actions of Jean Quan. – It is a point of great irony to have a former Berkeley educated Liberal Activist embody the mindset of Dear Leader – To allow herself to still hold office only reinforces the use of non-lethal military action by other Mayors and the enforcement of city ordinances; created for wholly different purposes, to be utilized to suppress basic rights firmly penned in the framing of our nation’s republic. It has been noted that the lynchpin to Quan’s rise as a politician, contemplated resigning out of shame for the actions decided upon, which led to the attempted whole sale destruction of Occupy Wall Street and yet another martyr for their movement to rally around.
What we have seen is an egregious lack of checks and balances in municipal governments, with major American cities being run as principalities, and the actions of Democratic, Independent Mayors and one Colorado Governor reflects a stringent practice of Machiavellian rule. When mayors run unchecked with the assertion of absolution and the disposition of being humans absolved from the repercussions of human actions; actions that we average humans must be held accountable for and face punishment in adherence to the boundaries of the law, there begins to develop a feel of entrenchment by the warring factions (OWS and America’s Mayors.) While the role of Mayor is to be an applicator of rules and laws passed by council, mayors are fallible, it is human nature to act in one’s own interest. Which makes the case study of Occupy Atlanta and Mayor Kasim Reed that much more interesting.
Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed, age 41, is the first mayor to not come from the Boomer generation. Reed is an elder member of a generation raised on MTV, who in his twenty’s benefited along with fellow members of his generation with a booming economy supported by technological innovation of the 1990’s; truly the last time anyone in America saw an opportunity for such a broad base of college graduates to pull themselves up by their boot straps. A former music industry lawyer, (a dagger wielding corporate culture) Reed was more likely an individual who praised the destruction of Napster and Limewire and well versed in the art of 360 deals. It is no surprise that someone with his pedigree became mayor of America’s third largest corporate music center. The duality can clearly be noted between the city’s past mayor Shirley Franklin who publicly announced her involvement in anti-nuclear arms protests and the like. Former Atlanta Mayor Franklin shares much more in common with Oakland’s Jean Quan than Reed, however, the adjudication; the thought process of how OWS should be handled in terms of turning the other cheek or of suppression through means of violence or passive aggressive politics is one in the same between Quan and Kasim Reed. Furthermore, the two cities are currently facing a change in populace and thus a shift in their classic political values. Atlanta like Oakland is seeing a shift to the center in many neighborhoods that are critical to the Democratic Party’s re-election campaigns.
While there are those humanist who cry foul and expect more out of their minority Mayors it is somewhat backwards in progressive American theory to force through a method of shame an African-American Mayor to “act” more like an African-American Politician should. Whatever the hell that means. Even more so flawed is the expectations of a group of liberal elites in Northern California, on a woman who once recognized their plight as that of their own to still embody the activist of her youth, though time clearly dictates this to be an impossible feat.
We cannot predict what other Democratic mayors will do? Perhaps acts of passive aggression will aid in ending the OWS before Christmas, taking a page from Mayor Bloomberg’s book and limit the protesters ability to survive in winter’s cold embrace. Unfortunately for the Mayors of America the occupation exists in two realms, that of the physical, which can be controlled and maintained; a world without the ocular perversion of constant protest is preserved, and the cyber world. OWS and its core principles have haphazardly invaded the minds of Americans, a place where ordinances prohibiting the wearing of bandanas over the face and the use of generators do not apply. Where protests of the past have necessitated a central location to spread and grow the present movement can survive with the maintenance and security of a basic url. Without the assistance of corporate censorship; an action that would desecrate the spirit of 76, this clearer than ever has matured into a battle meant to be fought out in the halls of congress, in ballots and referendums not by city councils and mayoral offices.