Canadian organizers of the so-called Occupy movement are ramping up efforts to rally "against spiritual wickedness in high places" during a global day of action Saturday that now has the backing of at least a couple of major unions, and has put police and businesses on alert.The virtuous ones aim to root out "wickedness"? Well, don't they always? Surveying past efforts to do so, it's a cinch that it's all going to go swimmingly.
Incidentally, the Ceeb is polling people about their views re the relevance--yay or nay--of "Occupy Bay Street". As of now, nearly 70% of respondents (talk about your motivated voters!) have answered in the affirmative.
Update: As always, Mark Steyn puts it into perspective:
Many protesters have told sympathetic reporters that "it's our Arab Spring." Put aside the differences between brutal totalitarian dictatorships and a republic of biennial elections, and simply consider it in economic terms: At the "Occupy" demonstrations, not-so-young college students are demanding that their tuition debt be forgiven. In Egypt, half the population lives in poverty; the country imports more wheat than any other nation on the planet, and the funds to do that will dry up in a couple months' time. They're worrying about starvation, not how to fund half a decade of Whatever Studies at Complacency U.
One sympathizes. When college tuition is $50,000 a year, you can't "work your way through college" – because, after all, an 18-year-old who can earn 50-grand a year wouldn't need to go to college, would he? Nevertheless, his situation is not the same as some guy halfway up the Nile living on $2 a day: One is a crisis of the economy, the other is a crisis of decadence. And, generally, the former are far easier to solve.True enough, but for the sake of "social justice" and its delusions of "fairness," protesters would be thrilled were everyone forced to live on $2 a day--so long as they could still have their iPhones, that is.
Update: David Solway--reviewing David Horowitz's latest book--offers this gift of wisdom to those wise enough to accept it:
...A Point in Time exposes how the redemptive quest of the “social redeemers” for an earthly paradise leads not to “the kingdom of freedom but the totalitarian state.” The kingdom of freedom is predicated on the assumption of a world beyond this one and a divinity without whom moral conduct has no guarantor. Right action is based upon individual choice to accept the existence of a moral domain that precludes the shedding of blood to attain a collective utopia. At the same time, this higher reality remains just that, an assumption, not an incontestable truth, rendering us — if I may quote Martin Heidegger, an otherwise unlikely authority — unbehaust, unhoused, roofless, insecure. Such is the human situation.