creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
Thomas Sowell
Thomas Sowell
22 May 2012
A Book for Republicans

Democrats have been having a field day with the cry of "tax cuts for the rich" — for which … Read More.

22 May 2012
Big Lies in Politics

The fact that so many successful politicians are such shameless liars is not only a reflection on them, it is … Read More.

18 May 2012
A Racial Revolution?

Now that census data show — for the first time in American history — the number of white babies … Read More.

Democracy Versus Mob Rule

Share Comment

In various cities across the country, mobs of mostly young, mostly incoherent, often noisy and sometimes violent demonstrators are making themselves a major nuisance.

Meanwhile, many in the media are practically gushing over these "protesters," and giving them the free publicity they crave for themselves and their cause — whatever that is, beyond venting their emotions on television.

Members of the mobs apparently believe that other people, who are working while they are out trashing the streets, should be forced to subsidize their college education — and apparently the President of the United States thinks so too.

But if these loud mouths' inability to put together a coherent line of thought is any indication of their education, the taxpayers should demand their money back for having that money wasted on them for years in the public schools.

Sloppy words and sloppy thinking often go together, both in the mobs and in the media that are covering them. It is common, for example, to hear in the media how some "protesters" were arrested. But anyone who reads this column regularly knows that I protest against all sorts of things — and don't get arrested.

The difference is that I don't block traffic, join mobs sleeping overnight in parks or urinate in the street. If the media cannot distinguish between protesting and disturbing the peace, then their education may also have wasted a lot of taxpayers' money.

Among the favorite sloppy words used by the shrill mobs in the streets is "Wall Street greed." But even if you think people in Wall Street, or anywhere else, are making more money than they deserve, "greed" is no explanation whatever.

"Greed" says how much you want. But you can become the greediest person on earth and that will not increase your pay in the slightest. It is what other people pay you that increases your income.

If the government has been sending too much of the taxpayers' money to people in Wall Street — or anywhere else — then the irresponsibility or corruption of politicians is the problem.

"Occupy Wall Street" hooligans should be occupying Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington.

Maybe some of the bankers or financiers should have turned down the millions and billions that politicians were offering them. But sainthood is no more common in Wall Street than on Pennsylvania Avenue — or in the media or academia, for that matter.

Actually, some banks did try to refuse the government bailout money, to avoid the interference with their business that they knew would come with it. But the feds insisted — and federal regulators' power to create big financial problems for banks made it hard to say no. The feds made them an offer they couldn't refuse.

People who cannot distinguish between democracy and mob rule may fall for the idea that the hooligans in the street represent the 99 percent who are protesting about the "greed" of the one percent. But these hooligans are less than one percent and they are grossly violating the rights of vastly larger numbers of people who have to put up with their trashing of the streets by day and their noise that keeps working people awake at night.

As for the "top one percent" in income that attract so much attention, angst and denunciation, there is always going to be a top one percent, unless everybody has the same income. That top one percent has no more monopoly on sainthood or villainy than people in any other bracket.

Moreover, that top one percent does not consist of the "millionaires and billionaires" that Barack Obama talks about. You don't even have to make half a million dollars to be in the top one percent.

Moreover, this is not an enduring class of people. Nor are people in other income brackets. Most of the people in the top one percent at any given time are there for only one year. Anyone who sells an average home in San Francisco can get into the top one percent in income — for that year. Other one-time spikes in income account for most of the people in that top one percent.

But such plain facts carry little weight amid the heady rhetoric and mindless emotions of the mob and the media.

To find out more about Thomas Sowell and read features by other Creators Syndicate columnists and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com. Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305. His website is www.tsowell.com.

COPYRIGHT 2011 CREATORS.COM


Comments

4 Comments | Post Comment
One should not fault the protestors for bypassing the middle men in Washington and going straight to the seat of power. In case you are wondering why this bit of messy protest just won't go away, try visiting this handy site:
businessinsider.com/what-wall-street-protesters-are-so-angry-about-2011-10?op=1
.
If the protestors in Egypt had followed your advice, do you think that the Egyptian government would have listened? No, they made things too messy for business.
Comment: #1
Posted by: Mark
Mon Oct 31, 2011 3:00 PM
How good would be discussing Thomas Sowell's and other wise men's work in public schools of all levels. Even better would be discussing them in totally de-nationalized schools after denationalization of public schools, public toilet and other low quality/high cost government "enterprises"
Comment: #2
Posted by: Vladimir
Tue Nov 1, 2011 8:51 AM
I am so glad Dr. Sowell included his comments on the difference between protesting and disturbing the peace. There are many people who believe no one should be arrested for protesting as long their protest is not violent against human beings. That is ridiculous. You can't block the entrance to buildings, block streets, occupy parks after hours, trash a public area, disturb the peace with noise, vandalize...etc, and say it is protected by the first amendment because it is in protest.

Protests come in many forms, whether through boycott, picketing (and obtaining a permit if necessary,) writing, blogging, use of media or other means. However, when a person breaks the law while protesting they should be punished according to the crime. Crying about excessive force or the police trying to silence your movement is a pathetic excuse when you are breaking the law while protesting.
Comment: #3
Posted by: Zack
Wed Nov 2, 2011 1:03 PM
greetings to you from south India. Please let me know about the Creators com and comments poly and events of summit areas to follow and please send your letter or news letter with information to my postal address and thanking you sir, and I am serving the lord by the Fellowship Gospel Services of Jesus since 3 years. And
thanking you sir.

YOurs Faithfully in Lord Jesus;
Bro. U. Yesu rathnam, Pastor.
arun Lankavaripeta,
Narsauram A.P. west g.dist;
pincode; 534275 INDIA.
Comment: #4
Posted by: U YESU RATNAM
Sun Nov 20, 2011 4:17 AM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Thomas Sowell
May. `12
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
29 30 1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31 1 2
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Author’s Podcast
Roland Martin
Roland S. MartinUpdated 20 Jun 2012
Marc Dion
Marc DionUpdated 28 May 2012
Steve Chapman
Steve ChapmanUpdated 27 May 2012

27 Jul 2011 Obama's 'Balanced' Approach

10 Jan 2012 Kodak and the Post Office

19 Jan 2010 Are Republicans "Due"?