Comment Up
In today's Palm Beach Post page B3--
At the Bryant Park Neighborhood forum:
"...there was a brief testy exchange between Amoroso and Hartman after
the commissioner called Hartman a “self-proclaimed anarchist” [Hartman has already said that he is a philosophical anarchist who believes in benevolence towards others...See my blog]. The Post writer goes on to say that Hartman plans
to bring a group of Earth First! members to the city in February to
register to vote, per Amoroso. "Earth First! is a radical environmental advocacy
group," the Post wrote.
Actually, Hartman has never said that he personally plans to bring this group to our city as stated in the Post article or has anything to do with this group's decision to come to Lake Worth or that he has any clout over a national movement. A radical is anyone who takes a position against the norm or just takes action for what he believes. A simple definition of the word "radical" is that others are actually
trying to get things done or take a different position than the norm. Most of us just sit around and do nothing when something "bugs" us. Constitutionalists are considered "radical" by progressive Democrats. I've been called a "radical" by some in this city for my conservative political views.
At the forum, Commissioner Amoroso said that we need to embrace all people but in this article he said, “They will be making decisions for you, the taxpayers,” Amoroso said. “It’s a wedge piece.” Hartman
responded to the Amoroso charge by saying that the Earth Firsters are coming to produce an outdoor musical and even asked the audience if anyone wanted to help with it. “None of
them, to my knowledge, will be sleeping in Bryant Park,” Hartman said.
Read the article...
Earth First describes itself as not an organization, but a
movement. They actually try to protect the environment and our planet that in many ways are being slaughtered by human activity. "There are no members of Earth First!, only Earth Firsters.
It is a belief in biocentrism, that life of the Earth comes first, and a
practice of putting our beliefs into action."
Earth First! has survived attacks by
moderates, would-be leaders and the agents of the system, remaining the
most diverse, passionate, committed, and uncompromising group of
environmental activists. Our direct actions in defense of the last wild
places only seem radical compared to an entire paradigm of denial and
control, where the individual is convinced they are powerless, and the
organizations set up to protect the wilderness continue to bargain it
away."
17 comments:
The other night, Amorosa told so many lies that you have to wonder if it is he who has the "disconnect."
Didn't Frank mcAlonan challenge him on something Andy said? Maxwell was smart and didn't take the bate. He let Andy do the dirty.
They're a movement? Well, I want them moved right out of town. Mark Easton says they are bad news.
LOL
After reading your fluff piece, I feel a movement of my own coming on.
What was "fluff about it?
Well, since we have some people with bowel movement problems in this city according to those who are anti-humanity and anti-homeless, please don't do it in our downtown or in front of a merchant's shop--especially Amoroso's.
The real radicals in this city are people like Wes Blackman, NA associations, John Rinaldi, Bob Lepa, some of the moderators of Facebook community pages, and so forth. It is all those who did not honor the will of the people in the Heights Charter Amendment. It is City hall and its top staff, the CM and city legal team. It is all of those appointed to a secret process, the ITN to figure out how to give our casino to Hudson Holdings.
Didn't the 'invitation' flyer for EarthFirsters to rally to LW also say something along the lines of "Must Be Willing To Be Arrested!" ?
Hartman's line of only being an anarchist "philosophically" is worthy of further questioning - How does that in any way diminish him as an Anarchist?
I am amazed that certain citizens of LW support the anarchists for Commission seats.
They are against all police, against government, against any immigration laws.
why don't they create a commune out west in unincorporated LW and live just the way they wish?
My thought is that they as a group, 'philosophically', have a mission to impose their beliefs on others.
And in this case, it's to impede our little town as best they can.
We keep letting them get their foot in the door!
lynn are you pro humanity or anti-blight?
Haven't seen an invitation flyer.
Ryan Hartman was the only candidate who gave the PBSO a rating of 7. I agree with this rating and in fact would say it probably should be lower.
He has not said in any debate that he is against government. In fact he has said that he wants to be a part of government and participate in the legislative process, that he is one vote. He has not said in any debate that he is against police but he does want to reduce crime, something this Trio likes to tell you is DOWN when in fact the opposite is the case.
People have the right to free speech. He is not imposing any particular belief on you. You don't have to listen. He is not here "to impede" our little town. I gave you my definition of an anarchist. What are you so afraid of? Why not call him and ask him or meet with him one on one.
The comment at 12:50pm tells a lot about you.
I say let's vote all the anarchist and their followers into office so everyone who thinks the current commission is so terrible because they haven't magically fixed everything, can see what real anarchy is about. Anyone who would vote for a person who says "I will serve every single citizen" is a fool. There's 40k residents in lw, so listening to every one of them is impossible. Listening to only the ones who blog and show up to meetings is foolish because they are a tiny fraction of the total population. And of the 40k residents, there about 39k different opinions, so tell me, which of the thousands of different opinions does said commissioner follow and serve? The claim of "will listen to every single person in the city" seems quite disingenuous, eh? I think we all know which residents those commissioners will follow
It's not about this current commission not fixing things in 4.5 years or longer. It's about the lousy decisions they have made during that time.
Again, you exaggerate. There are not 39,000 opinions in this city. It only matters who shows up at the polls and votes. If they don't show up, their opinion means squat.
What I believe he means is that he will be accessible for conversation, e-mails returned and phone calls answered and he will act, when he can, on solving problems. This current trio is 100% discriminatory when it comes to any of those things when it deals with any opposition.
Hartman has indeed said in the past that he hates the police.
And of course he is going to omit many things in debates. He would never get elected!
I do agree that while it sounds great to say he will be responsive to every single citizen, it is very naive to think he can do so, and to me, a 'sound bite' at best.
He's young, holds anarchist beliefs and in my opinion is in no way ready or able to serve our town at this point in time.
Young is good.
What he hates about the police is when they abuse their power.
People before politics is good.
Anarchists are pro "anarchy". Anarchy is NO government or hierarchy. Sort of how they describe Earthfirst!
The philosophy of anarchy is to dismantle a government by any means available. In this case from the inside.
The question to you asking if you are pro homeless or anti blight. Do you think the concentration of homeless at our parks and the plaza constitute blight?
My understanding of anarchy is that the power to govern derives from the people. The people award that power on a temporary basis for a term to those they elect. Like democracy. As opposed to monarchy or divine right. Why on earth do you think this man is running for office? I think the term is used in a very derogatory manner as a scare tactic to say it means doing away with all government, obeying no laws and promoting crime and chaos. By some. Like saying it's akin to being a criminal and lawbreaker. I believe at one time the U.S. at its founding could have been considered a form of anarchy--because we no longer accepted high taxes from England without any representation, which was the law at that time. Saying the power comes ultimately from those governed.
Post a Comment