Well that seems like a smart move on Mike’s part.

Ok, so maybe the books are okay.  But please, somebody, explain to me why there needs to be a raid at 1am?  If the purpose is to clean the park, why not pick a time when cleaning staff are working?  Why the media blackout?

WHY WAS THE AIRSPACE CLOSED DOWN? 

Why the riot gear? 

Why is a private company in charge of a public park, and why should a private company’s concerns be ranked higher than the actual public—especially a public exercising the first amendment rights of assembly, speech, and petitioning the government for redress?

Giving back some books sure as hell doesn’t indemnify these authoritarians from the anti-American bullshit they’re practicing.

Exactly, Caren. The books were a symbol of a larger problem; the larger problem is still there.

Sorry, but I really don’t get how camping = speech. There’s plenty about the raid that stinks, but I think we just make ourselves look ignorant and hysterical by eliding the difference between a protest and a shanty town. Of COURSE the enemy will use every tactic at their disposal to shut #OWS down. That’s why you don’t give them the opportunity.

No city that is on the up-and-up raids a camp of any kind in the middle of the night unless it wants to hide what it is doing, and the media blackout just confirms this.  While I’m with Caren - WHAT THE HELL ARE THEY DOING? - it’s my opinion that Bloomberg & Co. really doesn’t care.  They do what they want and they’ll survive the fallout because what ya gonna do, the damage has been done, amirite?  Just one more example of robber-baron capitalism being the enemy of democracy.

...and now democracy itself is under threat. Get. A. Grip.

I am guardedly happy about the Library—guardedly because this is just a picture of a bunch of books, and we have to keep an eye on it and keep the pressure up if necessary. There was a tweet from #OWSLibrary that “these look like our books,” so that is good. Hizzoner says they can be picked up Wednesday. We shall see what happens.

@Caren-Sun-blocking Creator of Animorphic Pancakes: I believe that it actually is their property; they had landscaped it, etc. and allowed it to be open space. It’s some real-estate investment company of some kind, IIRC. This is not uncommon while property is being “warehoused” waiting for “development.” I don’t know, but there might even be some kind of tax break or something.

This whole thing has finally made me break down and sign up for Twitter in order to follow @OWSLibrary. That was a sort of techno line I had drawn for myself. Wonders will never cease.

That isn’t a library - it’s a bunch of books.

It won’t be a library until it’s put back into the hands of librarians, given space and organisation, and a community is allowed to use it.

Oh, and this is neat - the catalogue…

And, to add a bit of humour, our girl Mandy has one of her books there - along with Neil Strauss’s PUA bible…

For the 30k+ people who were watching live this morning, we saw property from the park being thrown into piles then into dumpsters, likelihood of recovery of personal items seems slim to nil.

I think other posters are right to focus on the attitude of the police here.

They obviously clamped down on media coverage, and their PLAN was to treat the protesters as homeless people and just throw their stuff in the dump (although really they shouldn’t treat the homeless this way either; my point is that they were trying to make a statement rather than just cleaning up a park).

This is goung to backfire on Bloomberg, big time.

The great conservative lie to straight middle-class whites has always been that they aren’t coming for you later.  That their depredations are limited to women, or brown people, or the poor.

They want what they want.

Sorry, but I really don’t get how camping = speech.

The first amendment includes “the right of the people peaceably to assemble”.

eliding the difference between a protest and a shanty town.

There’s a long history of camping and not going away in order to protest—e.g. the bonus army.

Sorry, but I really don’t get how camping = speech. There’s plenty about the raid that stinks, but I think we just make ourselves look ignorant and hysterical by eliding the difference between a protest and a shanty town. Of COURSE the enemy will use every tactic at their disposal to shut #OWS down. That’s why you don’t give them the opportunity.

God it’s just a bottomless feast of sincere concern out here on the internet today.

...why don’t WE understand how HYSTERICAL we are, looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooolz

It makes me feel slightly better to hear that Bloomberg actually doesn’t want to be seen destroying books. Just slightly. Still doesn’t help the whole “turf the campers out at 1 AM and keep the press away” deal, though. That’s still rendering hyperbole dangerously close to obsolete.

I don’t understand this “speech” argument.  The right to peaceably assemble is written right next to it and is just as vital.

Even if you don’t think camping is speech, surely you think it’s assembly.

Punditus, the troll doesn’t recognize the right to peaceably assemble unless the protestors are wearing teabags on their hats.

I’m glad to hear the books weren’t destroyed—but I’ll still be heading to the bookstore this weekend to get another half-dozen books to donate. The best antidote to an attempt to quash free speech is more free speech—and more reading.

I really don’t understand what bloomberg is thinking: by evicting the OWS protesters, he basically proved their point.

I also don’t think it is completely fair to blame police officers for what happened. It wasn’t the lowly beat cups that planned this whole debacle; it was bloomberg and perhaps some of the hire-ups in the police force. It is in the spirit of the 99% theme to blame the top for such thing. Police are the 99%; Bloomberg is absolutely not.

There’s plenty about the raid that stinks, but I think we just make ourselves look ignorant and hysterical by eliding the difference between a protest and a shanty town.

ain’t that an interesting comparison. very unfortunate on your part though.

which African dictator was is again that had razed a whole bunch of actual shanty towns in the name of cleaning up his cities…?

Nope. Assembly /= sleeping. It’s not that difficult. Organise an ongoing protest? Absolutely. Move in on a semi-permanent basis? Try it, by all means, but don’t expect the law to be on your side.

Why am I suddenly a troll for disagreeing with people? Scott, you know nothing about me, but are content to assume I support the Tea Party, a shower of entitled white populists who proclaim their peaceful, law-abiding nature while pointedly carrying guns to events. I consider it vital that #OWS and similar movements succeed. However, I also dislike violence being done to common sense and the English language. That’s all.

@jadehawk

A tactless phrase, maybe. Not batshit insane, however, like comparing Bloomberg to Mugabe (I assume that’s who you meant; it could apply to any number of dictators).

Just following orders is never an excuse.

like comparing Bloomberg to Mugabe

i wasn’t actually. just pointing out that something being a shanty town doesn’t make its removal for spurious reasons not a massively autorcratic douche move.

@jadehawk

Then why bring it up?

Anyway, as I tried to make clear, my objection is actually fairly narrow - that all this talk about “suppressing freedom of speech/assembly” is kneejerk, sophomoric and very, very stupid. Doesn’t mean Bloomberg isn’t an autocratic douche. He clearly is.

Then why bring it up?

are you stupid or something?

again: I brought it up because calling something a shanty town doesn’t invalidate its right to exist, doesn’t make its removal a breach of people’s basic rights, and doesn’t make its removal on spurious grounds not an autocratic move. not when it really is a shanty town, and not when it’s just called that to dismiss it.

do I need to use smaller words and more detailed, step-by-step explanations, or is this clear enough now?

Try it, by all means, but don’t expect the law to be on your side.

The law is NEVER on the side of those struggling for freedom, Trolls At Noon.  No doubt you’d be whining that those Martin Luther King people had no respect for transport regulations…

BTW - the OWS people have lawyers; can’t they sue the city for the REPLACEMENT cost of any books (or other property) destroyed?

Nope. Assembly /= sleeping. It’s not that difficult. Organise an ongoing protest? Absolutely. Move in on a semi-permanent basis? Try it, by all means, but don’t expect the law to be on your side.

Says the teen in Cardiff, Wales.  I’m not denying your right to comment on American comings and goings but the basic rights we have are far different than your rights.  If anything we have more substantial rights but less economic ones…I digress:

The reason people need tents and sleeping bags is because as human beings we can’t stay up much past 24 hours.  Nobody is able to keep themselves awake for months.  Instead of leaving and reassembling they sleep in shifts so that at any given time any Occupy encampment has awake and assembled people and sleeping people.  In the US this is a time-honored tradition from the Bonus Army to Hoovervilles.  When we protest it isn’t for a day, it’s until we get what we want.  It’s kind of America’s indomitable spirit style.  Or perhaps that we’re just obnoxiously stubborn. 

With that said… Concern trolling is something I have a hard time following.  Usually it’s just a deviation of opinion or a slight acceptance of something you shouldn’t be accepting.  I believe it’s thrown around too much, trolling requires people to acknowledge what they say is intentionally drawing ire where I would say this is an honest person just not getting the point others are making.  It’s more like being dense than trolling…

Dilan, 12:

This is going to backfire on Bloomberg, big time.

Not really. He was out of electoral politics after 2009. If he changes his mind, people will have forgotten the details by 2016, especially if the long-term effect of OWS turns out to be negligible (though I certainly hope it won’t)

noon, 21:

Nope. Assembly /= sleeping. It’s not that difficult. Organise an ongoing protest? Absolutely. Move in on a semi-permanent basis? Try it, by all means, but don’t expect the law to be on your side.

What kind of power would protestors have if you just had to wait them out? The narrative was already that the occupation could be safely ignored because they’d all leave come winter; how much easier would it be to ignore them if you knew they’d go home at night?

Surely you’re aware of the history of vigils.

Paladeia, 23:

Just following orders is never an excuse.

In this case it’s kind of the point. If the police could just not follow orders and put up with the consequences, if losing your job wasn’t all that awful (though it’ll always be a little awful) ... there might not have been protests at all.

It wasn’t an excuse for Eichmann because it wasn’t true for Eichmann.

Come to think of it, people will forget the details even if we wake up tomorrow with Glass-Steagall in force and Citizens United not; people will see that it happened and think it was inevitable, and the protestors had nothing to do with it.

Shorter i’ll go to bed: The best way to preserve your freedom of speech is never use it.

Clicked on his picture. He’s like 14, max. So I understand the reactionary bent. It’s unfortunately a part of being that age.

Why is a private company in charge of a public park

Because as a building owner, they traded making public spaces for concessions elsewhere in zoning.

Personally, I think it’s okay for private companies to make public spaces.  What I don’t like is that they retain control in ways that truncate our public rights.  The playground in my neighborhood is maintained by a neighbor, on an unbuildable lot.  It’s not technically public, but we treat it as public land.

Most private land should be maintained as if it were public land.  And I think we should encourage landowners to do so… And we should also make it expensive or limiting to not do so - which leaves us with why there’s a privately managed park in New York.  The public demanded a park, and the private owners traded for it.  Why they still own and manage it, and control the rules to it… I don’t know.  I can get that they decorate it or clean it, I don’t get that they get to choose who uses it.

I disagree. I think Bloomberg is simply responding to the hyperbole surrounding the event to try and show that yes, indeed the books are safe. Now if we had believed the hyperbole those book shouldve been destroyed and we shouldnt be seeing any picture of books. I like how uncritically and naivelly amanda takes protesters word for truth. These people are so full of self-rightous bullshit that they feel they are above the law. Ironically this is what they are protesting in other peoples actions. People like that shouldnt be mindlessly believed.

crissa,
They arent stepping on your rights. One can assemble after getting a permit. Feelings of self-righteousness dont entitle you to treatments that others dont get. Everyone else, regardless of the issue theyre protesting have to get permits-these people arent any different and nothing says that they have to stay, shit, sleep and live in a public place that tax-payers are paying for rather than go home at the end of the day. I mean where does their shit even go? Thats a sanitation hazard. You guys are such lemmings.

#33 amanda,
So 14 year olds should be silenced? The irony of talking about free speech and then squashing someone elses due to their age. Sometimes mid-30-somethings shouldnt be listened to.  BTW as a later 20-something I agree with #4.

Hyperbole? I don’t think it was really unreasonable for people to assume the books had actually been destroyed/disposed of after they saw them being thrown into dumpsters.
That is what usually happens to stuff thrown in dumpsters. I don’t understand how anyone there was supposed to think “oh good, I bet they’ll just dust off the books and hold them for us at sanitation!” as the cops threw their stuff into garbage receptacles in the middle of a media blackout and middle-of-the-night-raid.

Also maybe you could actually look up what OWS has been doing about toilets before just assuming it’s a squalid cesspool of people shitting on the ground?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/05/occupy-wall-street-toilet_n_1077580.html

http://howtocamp.takethesquare.net/2011/10/13/dry-toilet-manual/

So 14 year olds should be silenced? The irony of talking about free speech and then squashing someone elses due to their age. Sometimes mid-30-somethings shouldnt be listened to.  BTW as a later 20-something I agree with #4.

Right wing troll is trolling…

Because…

I like how uncritically and naivelly amanda takes protesters word for truth. These people are so full of self-rightous bullshit that they feel they are above the law. Ironically this is what they are protesting in other peoples actions. People like that shouldnt be mindlessly believed.

Honestly, if the media has been more than just held off but literally legally prevented from even having a helicopter over the park when they cleared it the only reports are coming from these people.  Ultimately we have no other semi-reliable source since the police are representing this authoritarian push.  As for them being self-righteous, pot…kettle..black…what not.  I fail to see how they’re anymore righteous than the rest of us.  If anything they seem rather humble and only ask for basic concessions that level the playing field slightly.  Their demands aren’t even truly socialist so much as they are trying to bring capitalism back into line. 

Trolls gotta troll and all that…

If anything I find it interesting that the people who are so reactionary against OWS are the people who most likely would benefit from them winning benefits.  I would gladly lay down my title and social appearance if it meant doubling my salary (though in the name of disclosure I already make more than the median.)

They arent stepping on your rights.

When they arrest the press and cut off air space to prevent public acts from being documented, they are. Why are you such an apologist for authoritarianism. People weren’t hurting anyone. The only people causing physical harm to others were the police.

WHy you feel the need to beat up on people causing no harm is a bit of a conundrum to me. Perhaps it’s because they got attention and your weak-minded failure of a middle of the road liberalism isn’t.

Bloomberg did them a favor by evicting them, and more so by doing it in such an authoritarian way. The place was festering with seriously angry young men who would most likely have been angry no matter what the economic system was like. It was rapidly becoming the kind of scene that would not just alienate the middle class, but well-educated, peaceable leftists as well. I spent a lot of time there and regularly discuss it with journalists who are in much deeper, so although my take may be arguable, it’s not based on ignorance or lack of first hand knowledge. It had gotten to the point where people who didn’t look the part and went into the park were in danger of being hassled. And anyone taking photographs was in real danger of being physically assaulted. Of course I agree that most of the photographers were assholes and sympathize with the occupants who had to put up with all that shit, but still, it’s no way to run a peaceful movement with aspirations to middle class acceptance. And keeping the public out of a public park was not a good way to bolster their argument that they had a right to be there. It was pretty much turning into a petri dish experiment demonstrating how a leftist movement could quickly turn authoritarian. Of course the leaders are very impressive people who tried to do the right thing, but their ability to control the park was limited. As was there knowledge of how to run a political operation. But I’m hoping many valuable lessons were learned and they are able to move on to a successful next step in the movement. The middle class wants to be supportive. The protesters need to find a way to allow them to do what they want.

It’s not unusual for me to be the most cynical person in the room, but I’m genuinely surprised none of you considered the possibility that the books in those photos aren’t the same books that came from OWS.

As for the policing tactics, their final solution was just the tip of the proverbial iceberg of the enormity of their anti-democratic tactics. The constitution is just something the likes of Bloomberg wipe their ass with. In NYC particularly, the cops can do whatever they want and the worst that will happen is maybe some taxpayer money will pay off some lawsuits several years down the road.

It had gotten to the point where people who didn’t look the part and went into the park were in danger of being hassled.

Evidence, pls. Methinks you’re making shit up.

Interesting tidbit I learned yesterday. Bloombergs’ girlfriendDiana L. Taylor, sits on the board of Bloomfield Properties, which owns and manages Zuccotti Park. I’m sure that didn’t influence his decision at all.

http://blog.buzzflash.com/node/13076

@chuckling one, comment 7 and sort of comment 8 both read, to me, as skeptical of the idea that these are the library’s books, and Amanda points out in the OP that this certainly isn’t all of them.
So, yeah. It has been considered.

Though lots of the books have OWSL written on them…I don’t know how invested the sanitation department or whoever would be in taking a fake photo, but that might be pushing it.

Actually, Bean Slap, the protestors were using the facilities at neighboring businesses, which allowed them to use their facilities, and they were cleaning those facilities as well as the park itself.

One never needs a permit to protest.  That is ridiculous on its face.  Do you think the mayor of Selma, Alabama, would have allowed a permit for a Civil Rights march?  The argument about permits is the most ridiculous one I have ever heard.  The Constitution trumps local laws.  That’s the nature of the system.  Your Bill of Rights rights will never be truncated by some local ordinance.  Did you or your cronies ever take a civics class?  I mean, asleep at noon has a couple excuses.  He is 14 and apparently Welsh.  He can’t be expected to understand our rights.  You, sir, are a moron.

If you need a visual aide:  http://s3.amazonaws.com/data.tumblr.com/tumblr_lu0sqtjPr31r4k4dho1_1280.png?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAJ6IHWSU3BX3X7X3Q&Expires=1321539710&Signature=fjVr2xKKJ0Sb2qgsF3gr4fLIfec=

It had gotten to the point where people who didn’t look the part and went into the park were in danger of being hassled.

In early-to-mid October, I showed up to OWS on my way back from church and on my way to a wedding wearing a suit and tie, and hung out, talked with some of the Occupiers, and walked through the park. I didn’t get hassled at all and I was dressed like a secret service agent (albeit with a more colorful tie).

Yes, it was very different in mid October. It was also different at different times of the day and night. It also varied considerably depending on particular individuals being there or not. Overall, it was a very good thing, but towards the end of the tent phase it was far, far, far from any kind of utopia. Moving on to a new phase is a good thing, imo, and Bloomberg gave them a gift by being such an undemocratic asshole.

“middle class acceptance” = are your protesters white enough and subservient enough to their betters? Do they come humbly, cap in hand, to beg their masters for a few scraps, or are they actually mad enough to think that they are entitled to living a decent life without apology?

Fuck the middle class. Historically it has always been the main driver of fascist movements.

Yo, newsflash. The middle class is far from all white. Much of that thanks to the civil rights movement, which was largely driven by the (first black, later black and white) middle class. But driven isn’t the key word here. It’s acceptance.  I’m guessing it would be much more accurate to posit that midddle class acceptance is necessary for a successful revolution. True with Nazi’s, Fascists, Russian revolution, Sandanistas, Pinochet, U.S. civil rights, and so on…

chuck, 48:

Yes, it was very different in mid October. It was also different at different times of the day and night. It also varied considerably depending on particular individuals being there or not.

So what you really mean is “certain individuals hassled people, beat up people with cameras, etc.”

In other words, any large enough gathering will have assholes. I stand in awe of your perceptiveness, o wise one.

@chuckling one: The middle class that matters, that is the group of people whose opinion brings ‘credibility’ to social movements, is white and conservative. It is middle managers and small capitalists, the sort of people who have an inflated sense of their importance to society (the ones the teabaggers call ‘producers’) and oppose all social justice movement on principle. Middle class acceptance is basically the death knell of social movements. Civil rights when parsed through middle class acceptance becomes tokenism. Gay rights after middle class acceptance ends up only caring about propagating heteronormative fights like that for ‘gay marriage’. And so forth.

Mayor Bloomberg and those who cheer him on are acting quite like the “useful idiots” to OWS and its supporters.  What a great way to not only alienate…..but also facilitate greater sympathy for OWS and prove you and your supporters are authoritarian/totalitarian rubes who feel “Every time I hear the word culture, I reach for my gun”. 

“middle class acceptance” = are your protesters white enough and subservient enough to their betters? Do they come humbly, cap in hand, to beg their masters for a few scraps, or are they actually mad enough to think that they are entitled to living a decent life without apology?

Fuck the middle class. Historically it has always been the main driver of fascist movements.

True with Nazi’s, Fascists, Russian revolution, Sandanistas, Pinochet

Your definition of “middle class” must be different than the working definition I and most other historians/political scientists use. 

One key reasons why fascist movements became so successful in Germany, Italy, and Imperial Japan was that there was no real effective middle-class to speak of.  Due to prior social stratifications and economic situations….those societies were mainly dominated by the upper-class aristocrats/industrialists and a larger proportion of workers and farmers. 

In the case of the Weimar Republic…..the strongest political parties tended to be the Communist party and Fascist parties…including the Nazis.*  Imperial Japan was dominated by extreme right-wing parties desiring to retain aristocratic/upper-class business privileges with some pronto-fascist/fascist leanings* and a variety of radical-left movements.  The latter was seen as such a threat the Imperial Japanese government instituted a series of secret/military police services specifically to suppress/eradicate them. 

In short, unless I’m missing something….none of those societies had enough of a middle class for it to be a viable meaningful political force. 

Moreover, Imperial Russia**, Chile, and Nicaragua were all examples of either feudal agrarian societies dominated by aristocracy or “Hacienda economies” where there’s an effective aristocracy of wealthy landowners and/or family/friends of the presiding dictator/ruling elite.  None of them had a politically meaningful “middle-class” as far as I can tell. 

* The Conservative/Fascist movements in those societies had plenty of support from the workers and farmers…...especially the farmers.  There’s a reason why Marx once wrote that the peasant/farmers tended to be quite reactionary politically. 

** At the point of the October Revolution in 1917, Russia had only been freed from serfdom for around 5 decades and was still heavily dominated by the aristocracy.

FWIW, Rachel Maddow is reporting that most of the library is lost:

http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/11/16/8838537-update-the-peoples-library-not-so-safely-stored

Exholt, interesting. My impression is that in most of those cases although the middle class was small, it was their acceptance of the movement that was the final straw that broke the old regime. Not prepared to argue it though I’m sure it would be a fascinating conversation. American civil rights movement is a good example though. And Vietnam I think as well.

Blackbloc, I think you might have a bit more trouble successfully arguing your points, they are kinda black/white and I’m sure there is some gray in there, be it light gray or dark. But I can tell you that at least a big part of OWS has strived for middle class acceptance and the way the camp was deteriorating made it less and less likely.

>>Your definition of “middle class” must be different than the working definition I and most other historians/political scientists use.

I’m using standard definitions. Class definition is mostly based on relationship to capital.

Owning class = large capital owners, who must hire labor to utilize their capital.

Ruling class = those who have political power. Usually used interchangeably with owning class ever since the advent of capitalism, may have some remnants of the aristocracy (but by the early 20th, those tended to be capital owners as well)

Working class/proletariat = non-owning class, only have their labor to sell on the market. Typically left-wing, unless they are declasse elements that started higher in the class hierarchy. Marxists tend to divide the lumpenproletariat (those who are unable to work) from these because they feel without labor power they have an entirely different relationship to capital than the rest of the working class. Anarchists tend to see the distinction as moot.

Middle class = the class of those who neither own capital at a level necessitating hiring a significant amount of labor nor are directly hired by capital owners. Small business owners, priests, academics, journalists, etc… In general subservient to the owning class anyway due to being devoid of actual power (see: Manufacturing Consent). The middle class is an unstable and dying class, and thus by definition it is more likely to be attracted to backward-looking, reactionary politics. It makes up most of the fascist movement, with declasse elements making up the rest (the ultimate fate of middle class folks is to ultimately become declasse anyway, as they are a dying class).

Peasants = they’re sort of in-between middle class and working class. Marx was talking about landed peasants, who do tend towards a more reactionary outlook due to their affinity with the middle class and the fact that they, also, are a dying class at risk of becoming declasse. Those who are landless tend to be left-wing in outlook, and have been the proponent of land reform for instance in Latin America.

As for the aristocracy, it being enamored of fascism is also due to their class being a dying class. They tend to be monarchists or royalists instead of revolutionary fascists, though. More Franco supporters than Nazis, in other words.

I’m largely in agreement with BlackBloc here but lets define the categories in a little bit more of an americanist bent…

Upper Class = Ownership class, elite 1% and their friends in the 9% who own a huge chunk of the rest.

Upper Middle Class = Makes over 100,000 and is the next 10% or so, all white collar workers but not all of the white collar jobs.

Lower Middle Class = Traditionally a mixture of higher skilled proletariat types and lesser paid white collar jobs.  Ironically 90% of Academia falls into this category…

Working Class = Proletariat.  They are the minimum and just above minimum wage blue collar workers.  They tend to get lumped into the lower middle class because admitting we have a working class is marxist in the latter-half of the 20th century.

Poverty class = The bottom rung, no power, no money, about 14% of America and totally uncared for. 

The problem is Lower Middle Class aspires to be Upper Middle Class and so depending on where they are in the economic scheme vote either with the two lower groups or the two higher groups.  The whole “pandering to the middle class” is about drawing in those white Upper Middle Class types who have deep pockets but get turned off by the idea of Working Class people.

Of course this is a very Marxist historical view and while it may not be the absolute dominant view in history at the moment it certainly has the plurality.

BlackBloc, I don’t think most people make that distinction between working and middle class, lumping them together. I’ve always seen the distinction as being the type of work being done—working class being physical labour, and middle class being white collar workers. I don’t know that most people even bother with that distinction.

In short, unless I’m missing something….none of those societies had enough of a middle class for it to be a viable meaningful political force.

Have you taken into account the massively successful literacy program that Japan created during the Meniji Era that grew and expanded the middle-class in Japan? 

A modern concept of childhood emerged in Japan after 1850 as part of its engagement with the West. Meiji era leaders decided the nation-state had the primary role in mobilizing individuals - and children - in service of the state. The Western-style school was introduced as the agent to reach that goal. By the 1890s, schools were generating new sensibilities regarding childhood. [3] After 1890 Japan had numerous reformers, child experts, magazine editors, and well-educated mothers who bought into the new sensibility. They taught the upper middle class a model of childhood that included children having their own space where they read children’s books, played with educational toys and, especially, devoted enormous time to school homework. These ideas rapidly disseminated through all social classes

The rise of militarism led to the use of the education system to prepare the nation for war. The military even sent its own instructors to schools.

Contrast this with Czarist-era Russia, which in the same time frame decided against increasing literacy by education in the general population, we all know how well that worked out.

And, there had been a middle-class in Germany before WWI and the post-war economic woes took their separate tolls on the population, Hitler himself was from that class and perhaps his understanding of that psychology contributed to his success.

In Germany, Hitler ramped up the economy by increasing spending on the military and public works.  The autobahn, and the increase in activities that were directly/indirectly state-sanctioned were a hit with the German middle-class of the time.  As one man who lived in Germany back then said, “If Hitler had died in 1938, he would’ve been remembered as one of the greatest Germany leaders of all of history.”

I’m afraid you need a little more detail to your history, exholt.

I wasn’t denying the existence of a middle-class in each of those societies…..I was arguing that they were so small and insignificant that they weren’t a meaningful factor in those societies’ political cultures. 

Have you taken into account the massively successful literacy program that Japan created during the Meniji Era that grew and expanded the middle-class in Japan?

The Imperial Japanese government was raising their nation’s literacy race for the express purpose of serving the interests of the Japanese Emperor, imperial family, and the aristocrats/upper-class industrialists. 

Though this could have had an unintended consequence of raising a viable politically active middle-class…..that was short-circuited through a political culture dominated by aristocratic/upper-class interests…..whether that’s a parliament completely dominated by political parties whose sole constituency were different factions of the aristocratic/upper-class industrialist classes or the fact that up till 1925…..minimum property owning & wealth requirements on the basis of paying more than 15 Yen/year in taxes in 1890 and probably more in subsequent decades.  A requirement which meant the franchise was limited to less than 10% of the adult population.  One can comfortably conclude that this meant political participation was limited to less than the top 10% of the wealthiest property owners in Japan. 

I don’t know about you….but the above sounds like a facade of parliamentary democracy completely dominated by the aristocrats and the wealthiest industrialists as even some in the upper-classes wouldn’t qualify under such restrictions….much less the middle-class of the period. 

This factor was one major reason why there were many radical-left movements in Japan in the late 19th century onwards…..there was no political alternative when the de jure political system effectively shut them out for not having sufficient wealth/owned property. 

Moreover, one also must taken into account the fact that the parliamentary system….even under the so-called Taisho Democracy was little more than an aristocrat/upper-class dominated facade to show Westerners how “progressive” they supposedly were….not.  Especially when from the early 20th century….the underground radical left movements…including anarchist groups were viewed as such serious threats that secret police agencies and anti-subversion laws specifically targeting those movements were created. 

And, there had been a middle-class in Germany before WWI and the post-war economic woes took their separate tolls on the population, Hitler himself was from that class and perhaps his understanding of that psychology contributed to his success.

It was small…but had some promising growth before WWI.  However, the small German middle-class were eviscerated by WWI, Treaty of Versailles, hyperinflation of the early ‘20s, and after a brief respite…the Great Depression.  During the entire Weimar period….the main political contenders were the aristocrats/upper-class industrialists and their working-class/peasant sympathizers seeking to reassert “German greatness” on the one side and working-class-oriented Communists and other left-wing movements trying to fight against the former’s political domination, exploitation, and privileges/wealth gained at their direct expense.  What little was left of the middle-class were politically insignificant in the greater scheme of Weimar German politics. 

I will grant you that Hitler’s family were middle-class*....but Hitler fell out of the middle-class a few years before WWI when he squandered what little inheritance he received from his deceased mother not too long after he failed to gain admission to the Vienna Art Academy for the second time. 

At some points, he was homeless and down & out living in poorhouses while earning pennies painting postcards.  Frankly, some would say he was quite a miserable pathetic figure before 1914.  If he wasn’t able to gain and exploit his WWI military service in the German army to get into inter-war radical right-wing German politics, he’d probably end up sinking into the very Lupenproletariat class Marx talks about…..he was already well-along his way there before 1914. 

* Hitler’s father was an authoritarian Austro-Hungarian customs official who had a decent career and pension.  However, his misguided attempts at trying to be a retired gentleman farmer ended up leaving the the family in financially constrained circumstances before he died while Hitler was still a child.  His position in the middle-class was only maintained because his mother still had some money which sustained him and his siblings until she died and he squandered his portion.

I was arguing that they were so small and insignificant that they weren’t a meaningful factor in those societies’ political cultures.

What little was left of the middle-class were politically insignificant in the greater scheme of Weimar German politics.

Really?

The defenders of the Republic(Weimar-ed) were few, since disenchantment with parliamentary form of government was widespread.  The middle class of small and medium craftsmen and shopkeepers, the self-employed,  and the holders of assets in monetary form had experienced severe losses in their economic and social position when their assets, usually held in savings accounts and government bonds, were wiped out by years of war and inflation.

http://tinyurl.com/page-49

The Imperial Japanese government was raising their nation’s literacy race for the express purpose of serving the interests of the Japanese Emperor, imperial family, and the aristocrats/upper-class industrialists.

How does that conflict with developing a middle-class that you need for a modern military?

don’t know about you….but the above sounds like a facade of parliamentary democracy completely dominated by the aristocrats and the wealthiest industrialists as even some in the upper-classes wouldn’t qualify under such restrictions….much less the middle-class of the period.

Never said it wasn’t, exholt, and I never said that the enlarged middle-class was running things back then.

It was small…but had some promising growth before WWI.

Hans-Ulrich Wehler‎, a leader of the Bielefeld School of social history, places the origins of Germany’s path to disaster in the 1860s–1870s, when economic modernization took place(which usually means the enlargement of the middle-class, Ja?-ed), but political modernization did not happen and the old Prussian rural elite remained in firm control of the army, diplomacy and the civil service. Traditional, aristocratic, premodern society battled an emerging capitalist, bourgeois, modernizing society. Recognizing the importance of modernizing forces in industry and the economy and in the cultural realm, Wehler argues that reactionary traditionalism dominated the political hierarchy of power in Germany, as well as social mentalities and in class relations (Klassenhabitus). The catastrophic German politics between 1914 and 1945 are interpreted in terms of a delayed modernization of its political structures. At the core of Wehler’s interpretation is his treatment of “the middle class” and “revolution,” each of which was instrumental in shaping the 20th century. Wehler’s examination of Nazi rule is shaped by his concept of “charismatic domination,” which focuses heavily on Adolf Hitler.[63]

The historiographical concept of a German Sonderweg has had a turbulent history. Nineteenth century scholars who emphasized a separate German path to modernity saw it as a positive factor that differentiated Germany from the “western path” typified by Great Britain. The stressed the strong bureaucratic state, reforms initiated by Bismarck and other strong leaders, the Prussian service ethos, the high culture of philosophy and music, and Germany’s pioneering of a social welfare state. In the 1950s, historians in West German argued that the Sonderweg lead Germany to the disaster of 1933–1945. The special circumstances of German historical structures and experiences, were interpreted as preconditions that, while not directly causing National Socialism, did hamper the development of a liberal democracy and facilitate the rise of fascism. The Sonderweg paradigm has provided the impetus for at least three strands of research in German historiography: the “long nineteenth century”, the history of the bourgeoisie(the middle class-ed), and comparisons with the West. After 1990, increased attention to cultural dimensions and to comparative and relational history moved German historiography to different topics, with much less attention paid to the Sonderweg. While some historians have abandoned the Sonderweg thesis, they have not provided a generally accepted alternative.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Empire#Sonderweg

(cont)

What little was left of the middle-class were politically insignificant in the greater scheme of Weimar German politics.

Really?

The defenders of the Republic(Weimar-ed) were few, since disenchantment with parliamentary form of government was widespread.  The middle class of small and medium craftsmen and shopkeepers, the self-employed,  and the holders of assets in monetary form had experienced severe losses in their economic and social position when their assets, usually held in savings accounts and government bonds, were wiped out by years of war and inflation.

http://tinyurl.com/page-49

I will grant you that Hitler’s family were middle-class*....but Hitler fell out of the middle-class a few years before WWI when he squandered what little inheritance he received from his deceased mother not too long after he failed to gain admission to the Vienna Art Academy for the second time.

If you look at his lifestyle when he became Germany’s leader, although he had an enormous fortune because of the royalties from Mein Kampf and those from the German Reich for the use of his photo for the stamps of the time, he had a decided taste for middle-class decor, food, manners, etc.  Any

If he wasn’t able to gain and exploit his WWI military service in the German army to get into inter-war radical right-wing German politics, he’d probably end up sinking into the very Lupenproletariat class Marx talks about…..he was already well-along his way there before 1914.

Actually, there is some evidence that he flirted with left-wing movements briefly before he encountered the DAP in 1919.

Oh, and then there’s this:

Practically everywhere one looks these days the concept of “civil society” is in vogue. Neo-Tocquevillean scholars argue that civil society plays a role in driving political, social, and even economic outcomes. This new conventional wisdom, however, is flawed. It is simply not true that democratic government is always strengthened, not weakened, when it faces a vigorous civil society. This essay shows how a robust civil society helped scuttle the twentieth century’s most critical democratic experiment, Weimar Germany. An important implication of this analysis is that under certain circumstances associationism and the prospects for democratic stability can actually be inversely related. To know when civil society activity will take on oppositional or even antidemocratic tendencies, one needs to ground one’s analyses in concrete examinations of political reality. Political scientists should remember that Tocqueville considered Americans’ political associations to be as important as their nonpolitical ones, and they should therefore examine more closely the connections between the two under various conditions.

http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=7620748

And, of course, there’s this:

In the spring of 1940, a large Mercedes pulled up in front of my barbershop at 127 Koenigstrasse, and Hitler walked in. “I just want a light trim,” he said, “and don’t take too much off the top.” I explained to him there would be a brief wait because von Ribbentrop was ahead of him. Hitler said he was in a rush and asked Ribbentrop if he could be taken next, but Ribbentrop insisted it would look bad for the Foreign Office if he were passed over. Hitler thereupon made a quick phone call, and Ribbentrop was immediately transferred to the Afrika Korps, and Hitler got his haircut. This sort of rivalry went on all the time. Once, Göring had Heydrich detained by the police on false pretenses, so that he could get the chair by the window. Göring was a dissolute and often wanted to sit on the hobbyhorse to get his haircuts. The Nazi high command was embarrassed by this but could do nothing. One day, Hess challenged him. “I want the hobbyhorse today, Herr Field Marshal,” he said.

“Impossible. I have it reserved,” Göring shot back.

“I have orders directly from the Führer. They state that I am to be allowed to sit on the horse for my haircut.” And Hess produced a letter from Hitler to that effect. Göring was livid. He never forgave Hess, and said that in the future he would have his wife cut his hair at home with a bowl. Hitler laughed when he heard this, but Göring was serious and would have carried it out had not the Minister of Arms turned down his requisition for a thinning shears.

http://tinyurl.com/I-was-Hitlers-Barber

The middle class of small and medium craftsmen and shopkeepers, the self-employed,  and the holders of assets in monetary form had experienced severe losses in their economic and social position when their assets, usually held in savings accounts and government bonds, were wiped out by years of war and inflation.

As a result of those years mentioned….the vast majority of them ended up being effectively “proletarianized” into the working or sometimes even the lupenproletariat classes as their former livelihoods were seriously undermined.

How does that conflict with developing a middle-class that you need for a modern military?

Not necessarily.  Imperial Japan’s military forces had an officer corps almost completely dominated by aristocrats and rural landed elites for its first 50 or so years.  Moreover, they were dominated by the two regional clans which played key roles in the Meiji Restoration….the Satsuma(Navy) and Choshu(Army).  In those first 50 years…scions from former daimyo and samurai of those two clans dominated the officer corps….especially at the mid-high levels with very few exceptions.  Even after the officer corps was opened up to non-aristocrats/landed elites, the vast majority of the rest tended to be from rural farming families where they were effectively co-opted by the aristocratic/rural elite values as their education system/social environment inculcated that from childhood.  Even so…..promotions to mid-high-level ranks still heavily favored those with aristocratic or rural landed elite backgrounds.  Something many former Imperial Japanese military officers from non-aristocratic backgrounds complained about. 

As for the enlisted soldiers and NCOs, they were all initially recruited through universal conscription from 1871 till the empire’s dissolution in 1945.  However, the vast majority of those most willing to be drafted/volunteer tended to be overwhelmingly from the rural farming areas….and thus…this is where the career soldiers and NCO tended to come from.  In fact, conscription tended to be focused on rural areas as the rural farmers tended to not only be much more receptive about the military as a “national duty” and a good route to a better living, but also because the military viewed them as being far less tainted by “subversive political ideas” and “corruptive decadence” compared with their urban counterparts. 

In short, a middle-class is not necessarily a prerequisite for a modern military provided the aristocracy/landed elite are willing to be trained in the modern techniques needed….and allow critical parts of that training to be imparted to the mostly peasant conscripts and NCOs.  In short, the feudal social order was effectively maintained in the Imperial Japanese armed forces. 

If you look at his lifestyle when he became Germany’s leader, although he had an enormous fortune because of the royalties from Mein Kampf and those from the German Reich for the use of his photo for the stamps of the time, he had a decided taste for middle-class decor, food, manners, etc.

Much of that came about after he became chancellor in 1933…....no surprise as being supreme ruler after his party used intimidation and dirty tricks to ram through the “Enabling Act”......he was the most powerful man in Germany….especially after Hindenburg died. 

I was talking about his life up to WWI before he had a chance to perform the very military service he would exploit for great political gains among the German radical right.

As a result of those years mentioned….the vast majority of them ended up being effectively “proletarianized” into the working or sometimes even the lupenproletariat classes as their former livelihoods were seriously undermined.

Yes, but they still considered themselves middle-class, and when Hitlers’ aforementioned spending on the military and public works had the expected salutary effect on the German economy, the middle-class expanded again.

And, there was a lot of disorder in Germany before Hitler took power, unlike in Japan, and it was worse than was found in Italy post WWI, page 50 from my first reference:

Political strikes, riots and resistance to legal authority, political murder and public slander were the deplorable characteristics of a chaotic society, of a fragmented economy. At the same time, the hope was awakened that national redemption and economic prosperity were just around the corner.

>i>Even after the officer corps was opened up to non-aristocrats/landed elites, the vast majority of the rest tended to be from rural farming families where they were effectively co-opted by the aristocratic/rural elite values as their education system/social environment inculcated that from childhood.  Even so…..promotions to mid-high-level ranks still heavily favored those with aristocratic or rural landed elite backgrounds.  Something many former Imperial Japanese military officers from non-aristocratic backgrounds complained about. </i>

Ah, I see, you don’t see the need of the enlisted men to be from a middle-class background.

You couldn’t hope to build a military machine with the help of illiterate rice-farmers or city laborers as your material, or the civilian industrial base necessary to support said military but you can restrict the entry into the officer corps quite easily, and ignore the middle-class altogether.

That’s how Hitler won over the German military, he didn’t tamper with the tradition of officers coming from aristocratic, usually Prussian, families, and of course the Night of the Long Knives demonstrated that Hitler wouldn’t tolerate any threat located in the military against him and the Nazi regime as well.

However, the vast majority of those most willing to be drafted/volunteer tended to be overwhelmingly from the rural farming areas….and thus…this is where the career soldiers and NCO tended to come from.  In fact, conscription tended to be focused on rural areas as the rural farmers tended to not only be much more receptive about the military as a “national duty” and a good route to a better living, but also because the military viewed them as being far less tainted by “subversive political ideas” and “corruptive decadence” compared with their urban counterparts.

In 1899, the Japanese Army surveyed their 20-year old conscripts, testing them for the ability, or lack thereof, to read and write their name.  This fact suggests that they didn’t want illiterate peasants as the backbone of their military.

That’s why literacy and a middle-class are important to a military establishment.

Much of that came about after he became chancellor in 1933…....no surprise as being supreme ruler after his party used intimidation and dirty tricks to ram through the “Enabling Act”......he was the most powerful man in Germany….especially after Hindenburg died.

He was well-supported by his followers after he served his sentence in prison for the failed Beer Garden Coup, and he lived a middle-class life style before his rise to power (that it was the political expedient thing to do is true), but saying Hitler wasn’t middle-class because of his 4 years between when he spent his inheritance and the beginning of WWI is an example of how not to think about history.

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/regional/view.bg?articleid=1378932

“Surprisingly, lower-income voters have the least favorable opinion of the Occupy movement, while those making more than $100,000 are more supportive. “

“While 85 percent of those who support the Occupy movement say they have an unfavorable view of Wall Street and large corporations, 64 percent of Tea Party sympathizers share that negative view.”

“More than 71 percent of all American adults have an unfavorable impression of the federal government, including 72 percent of Occupy Wall Street supporters and 86 percent of Tea Party sympathizers. “

“The Occupy Wall Street movement may be starting to lose its luster with the American public, with four in ten now saying they have an unfavorable view of the protests, a new nationwide UMass Lowell/Boston Herald poll shows.

“The online poll of 1,005 American adults reveals that 35 percent still have a positive impression of the Occupy movement, but 40 percent now say they have an unfavorable opinion. About one quarter of the poll respondents had no opinion or were unsure.”

BTW the majority of the protesters are white and middle class.

http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/10/occupy-wall-street-neighbors-drummers-community

“I was 100 feet from where 4,000 people were killed. Okay? That’s what’s missing here. You are a half a block from Ground Zero. You are not occupying Wall Street—you are occupying Zuccotti Park in my backyard. And you are drumming at all kinds of crazy hours. When is it going to end?”

(constant noise especially to people who suffer migraines, have newborns, pets, a job or children is simply torture. It belongs in a gulag not a supposedly peaceful protest)

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/11/nyregion/for-occupy-wall-street-health-is-a-growing-concern.html

“Soon the discussion had devolved into a fit of wheezing, with one protester blowing his nose into the mulch between clusters of tents.It’s called Zuccotti lung,” said Willie Carey, 28, a demonstrator from Chapel Hill, N.C. “It’s a real thing.”

“A team from Union Health Center offered protesters free flu shots on Wednesday and Thursday, though some declined, fearing a conspiracy.”  (a conspiracy????)

“Damp laundry and cardboard signs, left in the rain, have provided fertile ground for mold. Some protesters urinate in bottles, or occasionally a water-cooler jug, to avoid the lines at public restrooms. Food, from orange peels to scrambled eggs, is often discarded outside tents.”

http://www.kpax.com/news/occupy-missoula-feels-restricted-by-missoula-co-county-denies-allegation/

“The county says their concern about the occupy campers is they attract the homeless population who likes to camp along with them. They’re also concerned about the sanitation because of urine and feces being left behind on the lawn. The courthouse grounds workers then have to clean it up.County officials say Occupy Missoula used to have a portable toilet on the courthouse lawn, but last week it was tipped over and the feces were all over the courthouse lawn and sidewalk. The county had to help clean up the mess.Right now, Occupy Missoula doesn’t have a porta potty on the premises and despite these concerns, the county says it is not forcing Occupy Missoula off its lawn”

I also like how some posters here are putting that which affects men above women, ie safety from being raped/assaulted. They can fight for what affects both without throwing the other under a truck.

Yes, but they still considered themselves middle-class, and when Hitlers’ aforementioned spending on the military and public works had the expected salutary effect on the German economy, the middle-class expanded again.

Many working-class Americans consider themselves “middle-class”.  That does not necessarily make them so. 

In Weimar Germany’s case, the former German middle-class ended up joining the working-class/lupenproletariat group which ended up splitting their support between various radical far-right conservative/fascist groups including the Nazis and various radical far-left groups…including the German Communist Party(KPD).  One main determining factor was whether the working-class member prioritized virulent German nationalistic greatness or a better life for those of his/her social class and an end of exploitation from the aristocratic/wealthy industrial class. 

Incidentally, Hitler had strong German nationalistic feelings that probably had their origins and were derived from the hatred of his pro-Austro-Hungarian father, multi-ethnic nature of that empire, and virulent anti-semitism he picked up from the time he first moved to Vienna in his extreme youth. 

but saying Hitler wasn’t middle-class because of his 4 years between when he spent his inheritance and the beginning of WWI is an example of how not to think about history.

Actually, an individual can move from one social-class to another….regardless of what they identify with.  A reason why the fear of “proletarianization” among the pre-war German middle-class and aristocrats/upper-classes was so strong.  It was also a valid fear as the war, hyperinflation, and Depression ended up evicerating the vast majority of the pre-war German middle-class. 

In 1899, the Japanese Army surveyed their 20-year old conscripts, testing them for the ability, or lack thereof, to read and write their name.  This fact suggests that they didn’t want illiterate peasants as the backbone of their military.

Considering universal mandatory education up to the end of elementary school was mandated for everyone from the early 1880’s and was enforced with increasing totalitarian zeal in all regions…urban and rural…...the vast majority of rural peasants or urban laborers were actually literate and reasonably educated by the time Imperial Japan became an Imperial power in the 1890’s. 

In fact, one of the key reason for mandating a minimum of elementary school education was precisely to ensure their conscripts would be able to do more than merely read and write their names so they can be effective soldiers in an increasingly modernizing army.

One main determining factor was whether the working-class member prioritized virulent German nationalistic greatness or a better life for those of his/her social class and an end of exploitation from the aristocratic/wealthy industrial class.

Do you have any references to back up your claim? 

The failure of Weimar to contain and eradicate these movements was in part due to the economic conditions of the day. A reparations bill of 6.6 Billion pounds ensured that the economy was going to struggle. The hyperinflation and the French reaction to the strikes in the Ruhr did little to bolster support for the republic. they were seen to fail, and many wanted a stronger form of dictatorial government. Support from all sides was lacking. Unemployment meant that the lower classes waned towards the left wing. A lack of national pride led to right wing movements gaining in popularity. Economic disasters led to the middle classes and even the aristocrats looking to the extremities for answers.

Weimar’s failure was sealed by the constitution itself. No one party could take control with ease. Proportional representation led to a large number of small parties with little political clout. these hung on to the larger parties, who in turn relied upon these groups to stay in power. Little could be achieved in this political climate. progressive measures would be opposed by some within the coalition and would not see the light of day. It was this lack of strength and inability to unite that again led to the extremist movements of the right and left wing becoming more popular. Ultimately though it was the law that led to the downfall of the Weimar Republic. The president could, according to the constitution, rule by decree. This enabled Hitler, upon assuming the role, to legally take measures that ensured a rapid end to democracy within Germany.

http://www.gcsehistory.org.uk/modernworld/germany/failureofweimar.htm

Most historians agree that many industrial leaders identified the Weimar Republic with labour unions and with the Social Democrats, who had established the Versailles concessions of 1918/1919. Although some did see Hitler as a means to abolish the latter, the Republic was already unstable before any industry leaders were supporting Hitler. Even those who supported Hitler’s appointment often did not want Nazism in its entirety and considered Hitler a temporary solution in their efforts to abolish the Republic. Industry support alone cannot explain Hitler’s enthusiastic support by large segments of the population, including many workers who had turned away from the left.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weimar_Republic#Economic_problems

And, of course, you have avoided talking about the economic problems of Weimar Germany altogether in your ‘analysis’ here, why is that?

A reason why the fear of “proletarianization” among the pre-war German middle-class and aristocrats/upper-classes was so strong.

Not really:

From the 1890s onwards, the most effective opposition to the monarchy came from the newly formed Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD), which advocated Marxism. The threat of the SPD to the German monarchy and industrialists caused the state both to crack down on the party’s supporters and to implement its own programme of social reform to soothe discontent. Germany’s large industries provided significant social welfare programmes and good care to their employees, as long as they were not identified as socialists or trade-union members. The larger industrial firms provided pensions, sickness benefits and even housing to their employees.[47]

Having learned from the failure of Bismarck’s Kulturkampf, Wilhelm II maintained good relations with the Roman Catholic Church and concentrated on opposing socialism.[51] This policy failed when the Social Democrats won ⅓ of the votes in the 1912 elections to the Reichstag, and became the largest political party in Germany. The government remained in the hands of a succession of conservative coalitions supported by right-wing liberals or Catholic clerics and heavily dependent on the Kaiser’s favour. The rising militarism under Wilhelm II caused many Germans to emigrate to the U.S. and the British colonies to escape mandatory military service.

During World War I, the Kaiser increasingly devolved his powers to the leaders of the German High Command, particularly future President of Germany, Field Marshal Paul von Hindenburg and Generalquartiermeister Erich Ludendorff. Hindenburg took over the role of commander–in–chief from the Kaiser, while Ludendorff became de facto general chief of staff. By 1916, Germany was effectively a military dictatorship run by Hindenburg and Ludendorff, with the Kaiser reduced to a mere figurehead.[52]

Yes, they were scared shitless of the proletariat, which is why they did things that would accommodate that class.

Actually, an individual can move from one social-class to another….regardless of what they identify with.  A reason why the fear of “proletarianization” among the pre-war German middle-class and aristocrats/upper-classes was so strong.  It was also a valid fear as the war, hyperinflation, and Depression ended up evicerating the vast majority of the pre-war German middle-class.

I don’t deny that Hitler was in a lower class for a few years, but you bring it up without demonstrating it’s relevance to the discussion at hand, and act as though that should be relevant to this discussion.

Considering universal mandatory education up to the end of elementary school was mandated for everyone from the early 1880’s and was enforced with increasing totalitarian zeal in all regions…urban and rural…...the vast majority of rural peasants or urban laborers were actually literate and reasonably educated by the time Imperial Japan became an Imperial power in the 1890’s.

C. Beginning of illiberal education

In the 1880s, the government started to make use of education as an instrument to teach loyalty to the Emperor, nationalist spirit, as well as respect for authority. Military training was introduced in school. Textbooks were checked by the government before they could be used.
Teachers were forbidden to attend any political meeting. In short, the liberal methods of the 1870s were abandoned Education became a way of social control.

D. Education Act of 1886

In 1886, changes were again made to the educational system. Under the leadership of Mori Arinori, the Prussian model, not the American one, was used.

i. The administration of education was again centralized.

ii. The period of compulsory education was extended to 4 years. Schools were made more specialized.

iii. A Dual System was adopted. At the lower educational levels, a moral education based on Confucian ethics (i.e. Confucian rules of conduct) and an emperor-centred nationalism was added to the original Western practical training. At the upper levels, including the university, the greatest possible academic freedom was allowed.

iv. Supervision over the schools was tightened. Private schools were subject to official licence and inspection.

v. The supremacy of the state at every educational level, from primary school to university, was confirmed.

Yet to many die-hard conservatives like Motoda, Mori’s policy was still too Western and liberal. These traditionalists wished to establish an educational system that pre-served more of Japan’s national traditions. The opportunity came in l889, when Mori was assassinated by an ultra-nationalist.

E. Imperial Rescript on Education of 1890

This was issued by the Emperor under the influence of conservatives like Motoda. As one of them later admitted, the Rescript was intended to counter the growing influence of Western thought.

i. A rigid code of behaviour and belief was laid down for the people. The people were told not to give up national virtues like ancestor worship and filial piety.

ii. The educational ideal, according to the Rescript, was not the individual’s self-betterment; instead, it was the individual’s service to the state. School children were taught total and unquestioned loyalty to the Emperor.

Until 1945, the Rescript was memorized by all school children. It was the bible of patriotism in Japan.

F. Authoritarian education after the 1890s

After the 1890s, education was put under stricter government control. Textbooks were all written and published by the state. In these textbooks, the students were ordered to be absolutely obedient. Religious stories of Shintoism (Japan’s traditional religion) were presented as believable historical facts.

http://www.funfront.net/hist/japan/meiji2.htm

the vast majority of rural peasants or urban laborers were actually literate and reasonably educated by the time Imperial Japan became an Imperial power in the 1890’s.
 
Actually, the fact that the survey was made, and that it found different levels of literacy depending on where their recruits came from in Japan, suggests a more complex picture than the one you are painting.

Are you going to tell me that Japan was able to industrialize and modernize without enlarging the middle-class as well?

Too much pedantry, exholt, if you’re a typical product of your undergraduate school…...................

“Surprisingly, lower-income voters have the least favorable opinion of the Occupy movement, while those making more than $100,000 are more supportive. “
“While 85 percent of those who support the Occupy movement say they have an unfavorable view of Wall Street and large corporations, 64 percent of Tea Party sympathizers share that negative view.”
“More than 71 percent of all American adults have an unfavorable impression of the federal government, including 72 percent of Occupy Wall Street supporters and 86 percent of Tea Party sympathizers. “
“The Occupy Wall Street movement may be starting to lose its luster with the American public, with four in ten now saying they have an unfavorable view of the protests, a new nationwide UMass Lowell/Boston Herald poll shows.

“The online poll of 1,005 American adults reveals that 35 percent still have a positive impression of the Occupy movement, but 40 percent now say they have an unfavorable opinion. About one quarter of the poll respondents had no opinion or were unsure.”
———
So OWS is bad because it’s less popular? Pretty weak argument against OWS.

BTW the majority of the protesters are white and middle class.
———-
So what?

http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/10/occupy-wall-street-neighbors-drummers-community
“I was 100 feet from where 4,000 people were killed. Okay? That’s what’s missing here. You are a half a block from Ground Zero. You are not occupying Wall Street—you are occupying Zuccotti Park in my backyard. And you are drumming at all kinds of crazy hours. When is it going to end?”
(constant noise especially to people who suffer migraines, have newborns, pets, a job or children is simply torture. It belongs in a gulag not a supposedly peaceful protest)
——-
I love how you selectively quote from that article. The protesters agreed to curtail their drumming and limit it to a specific time.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/11/nyregion/for-occupy-wall-street-health-is-a-growing-concern.html
“Soon the discussion had devolved into a fit of wheezing, with one protester blowing his nose into the mulch between clusters of tents.It’s called Zuccotti lung,” said Willie Carey, 28, a demonstrator from Chapel Hill, N.C. “It’s a real thing.”
“A team from Union Health Center offered protesters free flu shots on Wednesday and Thursday, though some declined, fearing a conspiracy.”  (a conspiracy????)
“Damp laundry and cardboard signs, left in the rain, have provided fertile ground for mold. Some protesters urinate in bottles, or occasionally a water-cooler jug, to avoid the lines at public restrooms. Food, from orange peels to scrambled eggs, is often discarded outside tents.”
——
So people close to each other get sick. Big fucking deal. Same thing happens at school and work.

http://www.kpax.com/news/occupy-missoula-feels-restricted-by-missoula-co-county-denies-allegation/
“The county says their concern about the occupy campers is they attract the homeless population who likes to camp along with them. They’re also concerned about the sanitation because of urine and feces being left behind on the lawn. The courthouse grounds workers then have to clean it up.County officials say Occupy Missoula used to have a portable toilet on the courthouse lawn, but last week it was tipped over and the feces were all over the courthouse lawn and sidewalk. The county had to help clean up the mess.Right now, Occupy Missoula doesn’t have a porta potty on the premises and despite these concerns, the county says it is not forcing Occupy Missoula off its lawn”
——
So you cherry pick the one place that has some serious sanitation problems. It’s not even the one by Zuccoti Park, which is the one being discussed in the post.

I also like how some posters here are putting that which affects men above women, ie safety from being raped/assaulted. They can fight for what affects both without throwing the other under a truck.
——-
Well, if rape is a problem at OWS, I agree something should be done about it. It doesn’t mean the protesters should disband.

#71 flying nosehair,
What I’m saying is this isnt the big romantic ideal you lemmings exhort. These are whitebread America, not some working class movement (which btw the working class dont like them). They could afford, if they wanted to, to carry out their activism via a more considerate and effective method. They could also afford hotels. They have donations and free gifts from sympathizers-they dont have to cause squalor for people. I’m also pointing out that its not peaceful and dandy like you like to believe. When you try and compare getting whooping cough, living in feces and tuberculosis to the normal kinds of diseases you could get at school and work you have to realize how stupid and broad youre being. At work there is not mold all around you, people do not sneeze into the ground, there is not food debris lying around, you do not sleep or live amongst questionable strangers nor homeless people, people are not defecating in your sleeping, living and eating areas and there is no pressure to avoid going to the doctor because of conspiracys related to paranoia surrounding medical care. There is not feces on school grounds nor at work. There is also no pressure by faux douchy feminist men to avoid going to the police if raped because that would bring the police into the compound. At work and at school they have janitors who clean up messes and sanitation standards based off of professional science.There IS no comparison. You only really read about these things happening in third world countries, not the U.S. Gawd Occupy is like a fucking cult.BTW Zuccoti Park is also one of the areas-there was an article on it in the NY Times. There is no reason they CANNOT disband at the end of the day. Martin Luther, Susan B, ect have all built communities without squatting in public areas, becoming territorial and questioning anyone who is there and doesnt ‘look like them’ and erroneously calling it revolutionary activism. These people are pig-headed self-righteous assholes. Regarding the noise issue, that was to show that regardless of an agreement you will still have some douchbag continue to bang on their drums, blow air horns, ect because they are so full of their fucking selves to not care about their effect on others. The noise still goes on even with an agreement in place and it still goes on in other areas. These assholes could start plagues (many immunity shots are starting to become less effetive and newer strains of diseases are coming up) and bring questionable people into nicer areas causing safety and sanitation risk. I mean its NY, there are many immigrants there and it would be a great place for a new disease to be made from combining various old strains to create a newer and more immune resistant version. These people are all hypocrites and it just goes to show you that they embody the same kind of corruption that the police and anyone else they point the finger at have. At least in general, police hunt down rapists and murderers, they dont cover for them to keep outsider away.

Yes, they were scared shitless of the proletariat, which is why they did things that would accommodate that class.

While that did play a part, Bismarck also implemented this policy and the welfare state to encourage Germans with critical skills to remain in Germany rather than emigrate to the U.S as staying in Germany effectively became a better overall deal.  That aspect probably came about after complaints from the aristocratic landowners and wealthy industrialists that they were facing worker shortages and didn’t want to increase their wages….especially to the amounts needed to compete with the US farms/factories.  It seemed to have worked as not too long afterwards…German immigration to the US started to decline. 

Actually, the fact that the survey was made, and that it found different levels of literacy depending on where their recruits came from in Japan, suggests a more complex picture than the one you are painting.

The US military, some employers, and colleges/universities have all had to do variations of that in the present “Modern US” because K-12 education here is so uneven that being a high school graduate is no guarantee one is functionally literate. 

This is not accounting for the GED which according to what I saw of the study materials and heard from neighborhood kids who did it….that equivalency program only covers material up to the 10th grade level….and at an extremely simplified level compared to your average/mediocre US public high school.

In any event, the vast majority of Imperial Japanese recruits were literate enough to receive the necessary training.  Moreover, as the military profession was once the sole “privilege” of the aristocratic samurai class, the military forces not only offered a route to making a better living, but also a substantial elevation in social prestige in rural areas for the individual volunteer/draftee…..especially if they are deemed worthy enough during their conscript/probation period to make it a career. 

In contrast…the urbanites tended to regard military service as a necessary burden at best.  At certain periods they had such antipathy for the military that soldiers were ordered to avoid wearing uniforms outside of their posts* in urban areas to avoid harassment and even attacks. 

* Mid-late 1920’s. 

Are you going to tell me that Japan was able to industrialize and modernize without enlarging the middle-class as well?

As with the Meiji Revolution, the industrialization/modernization of Japan was exclusively driven from above by aristocrats who were former daimyo(Ruling regional lords) or samurai.  Nearly all of the first Japanese corporate conglomerates popularly known as zaibatzu were founded and largely ran by those from that class….especially in the first few decades.  Not surprising considering practically all of the first Japanese students sponsored to go abroad for Western Education, military training, and to learn about its society/industry were from the aristocratic samurai class. 

Not to say there wasn’t an enlargement of the middle classes….but keep in mind that this enlargement took place from practically zero as Japan was just coming out of its variant of feudalism.

While there were merchants in the feudal period….they weren’t remotely a middle-class in the modern sense….especially considering that wealth conferred no power/protection from the samurai class.  Daimyo/samurai felt free to effectively rob/confiscate wealth/property wholesale at best….and sometimes even beheaded merchants and other “commoners” on a whim if they even had a slight suspicion the latter were “disrespecting them”.  All without any legal repercussions as such actions were considered acceptable under the feudalistic social order.

While that did play a part, Bismarck also implemented this policy and the welfare state to encourage Germans with critical skills to remain in Germany rather than emigrate to the U.S as staying in Germany effectively became a better overall deal.  That aspect probably came about after complaints from the aristocratic landowners and wealthy industrialists that they were facing worker shortages and didn’t want to increase their wages….especially to the amounts needed to compete with the US farms/factories.  It seemed to have worked as not too long afterwards…German immigration to the US started to decline.

Bismarck wasn’t responsible for what the industrialists did on their own in the latter part of Wilhelmine Germany, seeing that he had been fired by Wilhelm II in 1890.

Again:

Germany’s large industries provided significant social welfare programmes and good care to their employees, as long as they were not identified as socialists or trade-union members. The larger industrial firms provided pensions, sickness benefits and even housing to their employees.

This was a post-Bismarck accommodation, exholt, not a continuation or governmental extension of Bismarck’s policies made by the private sector.

Please try to keep up instead of rattling off what you can remember about that period of history.

The US military, some employers, and colleges/universities have all had to do variations of that in the present “Modern US” because K-12 education here is so uneven that being a high school graduate is no guarantee one is functionally literate.

This is not accounting for the GED which according to what I saw of the study materials and heard from neighborhood kids who did it….that equivalency program only covers material up to the 10th grade level….and at an extremely simplified level compared to your average/mediocre US public high school.

Apples and oranges, exholt.

In any event, the vast majority of Imperial Japanese recruits were literate enough to receive the necessary training.  Moreover, as the military profession was once the sole “privilege” of the aristocratic samurai class, the military forces not only offered a route to making a better living, but also a substantial elevation in social prestige in rural areas for the individual volunteer/draftee…..especially if they are deemed worthy enough during their conscript/probation period to make it a career.

I never disputed that, exholt, just as you’ve never disputed that a healthy middle-class is necessary to support a modern military force.

As with the Meiji Revolution, the industrialization/modernization of Japan was exclusively driven from above by aristocrats who were former daimyo(Ruling regional lords) or samurai.  Nearly all of the first Japanese corporate conglomerates popularly known as zaibatzu were founded and largely ran by those from that class….especially in the first few decades.  Not surprising considering practically all of the first Japanese students sponsored to go abroad for Western Education, military training, and to learn about its society/industry were from the aristocratic samurai class.

I’ve never stated that the modernization was driven by the middle-class in Meiji Japan, exholt.  The next thing you’re going to tell me is that The Last Samauri was a work of fiction.

Not to say there wasn’t an enlargement of the middle classes….but keep in mind that this enlargement took place from practically zero as Japan was just coming out of its variant of feudalism.

No fucking kidding.

“That were made by the private sector.”

What I’m saying is this isnt the big romantic ideal you lemmings exhort. These are whitebread America, not some working class movement (which btw the working class dont like them).
——-
It’s a whitebread working class movement.

They could afford, if they wanted to, to carry out their activism via a more considerate and effective method. They could also afford hotels.
——-
Prove it.

I’m also pointing out that its not peaceful and dandy like you like to believe.
——
If it were so violent, you’d think there’d be a lot more coverage of it. How do you explain this?
http://blackinamerica.com/cgi-bin/blog.cgi?blog_id=222696&cid=10

When you try and compare getting whooping cough, living in feces and tuberculosis to the normal kinds of diseases you could get at school and work you have to realize how stupid and broad youre being. At work there is not mold all around you, people do not sneeze into the ground, there is not food debris lying around, you do not sleep or live amongst questionable strangers nor homeless people, people are not defecating in your sleeping, living and eating areas and there is no pressure to avoid going to the doctor because of conspiracys related to paranoia surrounding medical care. There is not feces on school grounds nor at work.
——
WTF? The article you cited made no mention of feces lying around. Yes, I realize it’s worse than the conditions at work and school, but the point is that it’s not as if they’re going to spread the plague.

You only really read about these things happening in third world countries, not the U.S. Gawd Occupy is like a fucking cult.BTW Zuccoti Park is also one of the areas-there was an article on it in the NY Times.
——
The article mad no mention of feces lying around.

There is no reason they CANNOT disband at the end of the day.
——
They can, but they shouldn’t.

Martin Luther, Susan B, ect have all built communities without squatting in public areas, becoming territorial and questioning anyone who is there and doesnt ‘look like them’ and erroneously calling it revolutionary activism.
———
By the time MLK came around, blacks had lived under Jim Crow for so long the CRA was bound to happen sooner or later. Susan B. Anthony failed to get women emancipated.

Regarding the noise issue, that was to show that regardless of an agreement you will still have some douchbag continue to bang on their drums, blow air horns, ect because they are so full of their fucking selves to not care about their effect on others. The noise still goes on even with an agreement in place and it still goes on in other areas.
——-
So you’re condemning a whole movement because of a few bad apples.

These assholes could start plagues (many immunity shots are starting to become less effetive and newer strains of diseases are coming up) and bring questionable people into nicer areas causing safety and sanitation risk. I mean its NY, there are many immigrants there and it would be a great place for a new disease to be made from combining various old strains to create a newer and more immune resistant version.
——
Start a plague? You’re either crazy or stupid.

These people are all hypocrites and it just goes to show you that they embody the same kind of corruption that the police and anyone else they point the finger at have.
——-
I’m amazed you could know something about ALL of them. I’m in awe of your psychic powers.

At least in general, police hunt down rapists and murderers, they dont cover for them to keep outsider away.
—-
That wasn’t in the least bit coherent.

It’s occurred to me I should add I was being a little flippant about comparing the sanitation, but you probably don’t know what flippancy is, BS.

Germany’s large industries provided significant social welfare programmes and good care to their employees, as long as they were not identified as socialists or trade-union members. The larger industrial firms provided pensions, sickness benefits and even housing to their employees.

This was a post-Bismarck accommodation, exholt, not a continuation or governmental extension of Bismarck’s policies made by the private sector.

Dark Avenger,

I was referring to Bismarck’s introduction of a state sponsored social safety net in the 1880’s…well-before he was forced out by Wilhelm II.  As the US didn’t have a welfare state…or any social safety net to speak of….Bismarck was doing this, in part, to reduce the appeal for Germans to emigrate to the US.  As such, it was certainly not “post-Bismarck” and also separate from what the industrialists decide to do on their own. 

I never disputed that, exholt, just as you’ve never disputed that a healthy middle-class is necessary to support a modern military force.

It can help if it actually existed.  However, the Japanese military was effectively structured along feudalistic lines so the few middle-class members would end up getting subsumed in an army largely dominated and led by the aristocratic/samurai and rural peasant sons who bought into the feudalistic power structure.  It was their feudalistic values and notions of social hierarchy/order that defined the Japanese military institutions….and it was the officer corps….especially the mid-higher echelons who had real effective political power….whether it was through being an effective “voice of the army” acceptable to the ruling elite(including other military officers), elevations to nobility for noteworthy service to empire, or through the persuasive mobilization of soldiers under their/fellow co-conspirators’ commands to launch attempted coups or assassinations to “save the empire” from “corruptive”, “subversive”*, and “greedy capitalist”** politicians and a parliamentary system(actually a facade) that was “too liberal” by their standards. 

* Mostly used to describe radical left-wing political movements/groups by the ruling elite…including the Imperial Japanese military. 

** Though a few officers flirted with socialistic economic systems…this anti-capitalist anger is derived mainly from feudalistic samurai notions that industrialist capitalists like pre-Meiji era merchants have forgotten their place as the lowest ranking group in a social order derived from Confucian social ideals.  The fact that most of the largest industralists happened to be aristocrats/samurai themselves mattered little….as their very involvement with commerce has tainted them to the point they’re no longer worthy of their aristocratic/samurai status.

As such, it was certainly not “post-Bismarck” and also separate from what the industrialists decide to do on their own

Germany’s large industries provided significant social welfare programmes and good care to their employees, as long as they were not identified as socialists or trade-union members. The larger industrial firms provided pensions, sickness benefits and even housing to their employees.</b>

This was a post-Bismarck accommodation, exholt, not a continuation or governmental extension of Bismarck’s policies made by the private sector.

What the industrialists did was certainly post-Bismarck, exholt.

It can help if it actually existed.

Again, I never said there was a significant middle-class in pre-Meiji Japan, exholt, but thanks again for playing the pendant here tonight.