Pittsburgh: Proof that Capitalism Works

This column was just published by The Pitt News. Read it below and comment.

G-20 protesters have descended on Pittsburgh not to protest any single policy of the G-20 but to rail against capitalism as an oppressive and unjust system foisted upon billions of people by a cabal of world leaders. These protesters promise to make our city their ideological playground filled with tent cities, anti-capitalist marches and – if the bluster of online anarchists is to be believed – violence directed against local businesses.

            

But Pittsburgh is a vibrant counterpoint to the incipient whining of socialists, Marxists and anarchists who seek to blame an economic system for all the world’s troubles. Our libraries, museums and universities are the product of industry.

            

Every building or public space with the name Mellon, Frick, Carnegie, Heinz or Schenley is a product of capitalism and the wealth generated by innovation and competition.

            

Of course, our city’s relationship with capitalism and industry has had its ups and downs. From the great railroad strike of 1877 to the Battle of Homestead to the attempted assassination of Henry Clay Frick, Pittsburgh bore witness to violence perpetrated by both labor and capital.

            

But in spite of the occasional conflict between labor and business, Pittsburgh’s economic history is one of growth driven by industry.

            

Although we look back on the practices of 19^th century industry with distaste and today view coal, the material that powered this nation, as a disastrous pollutant, Pittsburgh would not exist today as a center of education and medical research had it not been for our past industrial success.

            

Our story of success is one of hard work, competition and innovation and it is a story that goes hand in hand with the history of capitalism in this nation. The simple truth is that no other economic system would have enabled such a history and we need look no farther than the gulags of Soviet Russia, the murderous Great Leap Forward of Communist China or the authoritarian nightmare of Fidel Castro’s Cuba to understand the capitalist imperative.

            

The history or state-directed economies is the greatest vindication of capitalism as the economic system that allows people the greatest liberty and chance for success without undue impositions or interference.

            

Of course, with this chance for success comes the chance for failure and no capitalist economy is without those who have failed. This appears to be a major source of contention for protest organizations like Bail Out the People who kicked off this week’s G-20 protests with their March For Jobs on Sunday.

            

On their website, Bail Out the People called for “a moratorium on layoffs, foreclosures and evictions” and proclaimed “the right of everyone to a job or a guaranteed income.” The suggestion that everyone deserves an income regardless of his or her ability or work is ridiculous.

            

Bail Out the People is demanding that need be elevated above ability and that competition be abandoned in favor of an individual’s “right” to employment regardless of their ability to perform a job or the job’s necessity to the economy.

            

Bail Out the People is just one of the organizations protesting the G-20 but it is important to recognize their ethic of need for what it is and remember that neither this nation nor this city were built by giving jobs to the unqualified or by paying people to do nothing.

            

Over the next week, we will all be subjected to the protesters’ slogans, placards and proclamations. As they criticize and demonize capitalism as an economic system of oppression, we must remember that all we hold dear in this city would be impossible without it.

            

We must remember that capitalism’s critics have had their chance in other nations to establish socialist, communist and statist alternatives but have only succeeded in creating greater pain and suffering.

            

We must remember that for all of capitalism’s flaws, it has still proven to be the economic system most conducive to individual liberty and social mobility.

            

Let the protesters attack capitalism, let them march in our streets and protest outside our businesses because when they’ve exhausted their rage and the circus has ended, our city will still be standing as a testament to the achievements of free men and women engaged in a free capitalist economy.

Student Radicals Mistaken in Assault on Capitalism

Students and young people from Pitt and around the country have been planning protests against the G-20 Summit and, later this week, they’ll have a chance to prove their radical credentials and rail against capitalism in a public space.

            

At permitted and unpermitted protests throughout the city, radical students will, as one proclamation endorsed by Pitt’s Students for Justice in Palestine put it, “take to the streets of Pittsburgh to disrupt the summit and the institutions of capital that profit from its domination.”

            

At a meeting in David Lawrence, Students for Radical Change and Liberation even brought a speaker from Pittsburgh’s own anarchist group, the Pittsburgh Organizing Group, to teach them about participating in mass actions and managing their “arrest-risk” during the G-20 protests, PittBriefly reported.

            

Whether online or on campus, radical student groups at Pitt have assaulted capitalism as our great oppressor and planned to bring it to its knees during the G-20 Summit. But while students and other protesters will undoubtedly get lots of media and police attention during the G-20, the only thing they’re likely to disrupt is the lives of Pittsburghers.

            

The real assault on capitalism is being perpetrated by the heads of the G-20 themselves whose nations are less free market giants than bloated, planned economies. Remember, the list of G-20 states includes Communist China, the Oil State of Saudi Arabia and social-democratic Brazil whose current president, Lula da Silva, is the leader of something called the Workers’ Party.

            

If anything, the G-20 is an organization of major planned economies seeking to turn the world market into a safer, planned market devoid of the sort of risks and rewards inherent in capitalist economies.

            

In fact, the most capitalist nation on that list may well be the United States but President Obama, by proposing caps on wages at financial institutions and an expansion of federally funded health care benefits, is steadily moving our country toward a more statist economy.

            

But protesters would rather identify lack of health care, lack of jobs and global warfare as products of a global capitalist cabal than the result of their own inability to pay for health care, get a job or elect anti-war candidates to office.

            

Of course, the problem with scapegoating is that it’s an easily debunked charade perpetrated by those unable (or unwilling) to engage in serious debate about the facts.

            

The fact is that capitalism lifted this world out of the feudalism and perpetual warfare of the Middle Ages.

            

Capitalism popularized and funded the inventions that improved every American’s life from the steam engine to the telephone.

            

Capitalism made it possible for people to devote four years of their lives to studying Marx at a university.

            

Whether protesters like it or not, capitalism has done more to lift humanity out of bondage and poverty than any tent city in the history of man. Protest China’s human rights policies, Saudi Arabia’s treatment of women or the United States’ continued discrimination against the LGBT community but don’t build up a false enemy in capitalism as an excuse to disrupt businesses and communities in Pittsburgh.

Camping Protesters Violate City Law, Residents' Rights

This column appeared in The Pitt News today.

A group of six local and national protest organizations filed a federal lawsuit on Friday against the city, the state Department of Conservation and Natural Resources and the Secret Service, The Post-Gazette reported. The suit alleges that the three defendants have conspired to deny protesters their First Amendment rights by failing to approve a number of permits for G-20 related protests.

            
Represented by American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania attorney Witold Walczak, the six plaintiffs are Code Pink, The Thomas Merton Center, Pittsburgh Outdoor Artists, Bail Out the People, G6 Billion and the Three Rivers Climate Convergence.

            
They are petitioning U.S. District Judge Gary L. Lancaster to decide exactly how close to the convention center protesters will be allowed to go and to order the issuance of permits by the city.

            
The permits sought involve a variety of protests including a march from Oakland to downtown sponsored by the Merton Center and the erection of tent cities by Code Pink and the Three Rivers Climate Convergence in Point State Park. Similarly, Bail Out the People and Pittsburgh Outdoor Artists want to camp in East Park and South Side Riverfront Park, respectively.

            
This question of camping in parks and erecting tent cities is really the most baffling to me as a Pittsburgher because, rather than view this as a free speech issue, I see this as a question of the law and the rights of Pittsburgh tax payers.

            
City code states “No person in a park shall camp except with permission of the Director and only for groups of persons under adequate supervision. No person shall set up tents, shacks or any other temporary shelter for the purpose of overnight camping…”

            
Importantly, the parks director has not given these groups permission to camp in the parks, it would be almost impossible to adequately supervise these groups while they camp and it would be a violation of city code for these organizations to set up tents overnight.

            
These regulations govern the activity of every resident of this city throughout the year and I see no reason why thousands of protesters from out of town should be able to violate these regulations based on a flimsy claim that the First Amendment protects camping.

            
A statement on g20media.org, self-described as an “information clearinghouse and media support for dissent at the Pittsburgh G-20 Summit,”            called on activists to “claim Pittsburgh parks for the people” and “affirm the people’s right to use the people’s commons for our activities.”

            
But these activists don’t represent the will of the residents of this city and their assertion of a right to our public parks to use for their activities is ridiculous. The citizens of this city whose taxes pay for the maintenance of these parks will be excluded from them if these activists have their way and are allowed to use our parks as free housing for the duration of the G-20 Summit.

            
For all of their criticism of the G-20 leaders who activists claim represent an “undemocratic” imposition on the world and on our city, at least the G-20 leaders, diplomats and attending press corps will be paying for their lodging while they’re here. But instead of paying for their housing, activists are asking a federal judge to allow them to violate city regulations and set up tent cities in our parks.

            
There is nothing more undemocratic than thousands of protesters from out of town asking a federal judge to overturn the judgement of the elected leaders of the city of Pittsburgh.

            
The G-20 Summit itself represents an inconvenience to many Pittsburghers with traffic jams, security cordons and closed businesses that many of us would not have chosen to bring to our city. That being said, it isn’t right for us to also have to confront the kind of violence and vandalism that G-20 protesters have brought to cities such as London, Seattle and Genoa when they’ve hosted international summits.

            
The protesters planning to camp in public parks, hold unpermitted protests against scores of local businesses and hold unpermitted marches in Pittsburgh neighborhoods are taking our city from us over the span of two days and then have the gall to speak on our behalf.

            
Let me put it simply, the G-20 protesters do not represent the interests or opinions of an overwhelming majority of Pittsburghers who would prefer to have the use of their parks, streets and businesses the week of the G-20 Summit. It is inappropriate for protesters to assume the mantle of “the people” while they try to take from us our parks and our city. 

This Week's Pitt News Column

The summer is over and that means that I'm back to writing weekly columns for The Pitt News. This week's is about Students for Justice in Palestine and their involvement in the G-20. Below is the full text.

Tens of thousands of protesters are planning to descend on Pittsburgh in late September in order to oppose the G-20 summit being held at the David Lawrence Convention Center. Environmental groups, human rights organizations and advocates for the poor all plan on protesting the G-20 Summit and, although I disagree with many of them, I fully support their right to nonviolently express their opinions in public.

That being said, a small minority of protesters promises to physically disrupt the G-20 through illegal means. Organizing on the Internet, this minority has released countless statements denouncing capitalism as a brutal economic system responsible for the world’s ills.

One such group, the Pittsburgh G-20 Resistance Project, calls the G-20 “the managers of our oppression” and is calling on people to “confront and disrupt the G-20 and its political, corporate and institutional enablers throughout the city” according to a proclamation on its website.

Toward this end, the Resistance Project is planning an unpermitted march in violation of city ordinance on Sept. 24.

According to plans detailed on its website, the march will involve unspecified “direct actions,” a term that has, at past international conferences in London and Seattle, served as code for violently disruptive protests and vandalism by other groups.

Most notably, the anarchist Direct Action Network planned protests against the World Trade Organization meeting in 1999 in Seattle that included the vandalism of storefronts, the smashing of windows and violent confrontations with police.

The Resistance Project has even posted a list of targets for unpermitted protests, including Starbucks, the Carnegie Mellon Robotics Institute and the Oakland Planning and Development Corporation on Atwood Street.

The Resistance Project also issued an online statement calling for supporters who cannot come to Pittsburgh to “plan local actions” and to “disrupt schools and financial institutions” as a form of protest against the G-20 Summit.”

But this vague language is a clear threat against educational institutions around this country and their ability to function free from the interference of extremists. What really piqued my interest was that a Pitt student organization, Students for Justice in Palestine, is listed on the site as having endorsed the Pittsburgh G-20 Resistance Project.

Wondering why a student organization would support the disruption of educational activities, I spoke to Jonas Moffat, the group’s president. During our conversation, Moffat listed a series of grievances that, he said, justified his organization’s opposition to the G-20 Summit.

From President Obama’s escalation of the war in Afghanistan to the state of health care in the United States, Moffat’s grievances had absolutely nothing to do with the policies of the G-20 but instead focused on the policies of the United States as an individual nation.

Moffat’s sole criticism of the G-20 was that it had excluded Iran and Venezuela from membership in the group even though both states possessed large international economies. Our conversation became more confrontational when I asked Moffat if he believed that Iran, as a state sponsor of terrorism, and Venezuela, as a socialist state opposed to international capitalism, should be allowed into an international body designed to promote economic cooperation.
He refused to answer the question, saying simply that some people (he didn’t specify who) believed it and then said that some people also believe that the United States is a sponsor of international terrorism. When asked to provide a yes-or-no answer as to whether the United States is an international sponsor of terrorism, Moffat said that my questioning was too aggressive and ended the interview.

In a later interview with The Pitt News, Moffat said that he declined to answer the questions because the members of Students for Justice in Palestine have many conflicting opinions and he didn’t think it would be right to give an opinion on behalf of his group or inject his own opinion. Moffat did say, however, that his group’s leaders and more active members voted on whether to endorse the proclamation, and the decision was unanimous.

I respect individuals who defend their convictions reasonably and factually, but for the leader of a student organization to defend his group’s actions through innuendo and suggestions is simply irresponsible. Moffat owes us an explanation of his reasoning because his organization is calling on students to take action against their schools.

Moffat’s group has endorsed a proclamation calling on students to disrupt schools, and his only justification for this is that the G-20 hasn’t allowed Venezuela and Iran, two nations ruled by dictators, to participate in the Summit.

This is ridiculous, and what’s even more disgusting is that every student on campus is funding this group’s activities through the student activities fee. According to Moffat, Students for Justice in Palestine received about $5,000 in funding from SGB last year and he expects to receive even more financial support from the University this year.

Certainly, the student activities fee is used to support a broad range of activist organizations with goals not every student agrees with.

But Students for Justice in Palestine has called on students to disrupt educational activities, and it is unconscionable that we should all be monetarily supporting its existence on campus. Academic funds should not go to those who do not respect the academic process and instead encourage its disruption.

Indeed, Pitt’s “Guidelines for Student Organization Certification” says that student organizations must “refrain from advocating, inciting or participating in any material interference or physical disruption of the University” and by calling on students to “disrupt schools,” Students for Justice in Palestine is employing language that has led to such violations in the past.

It is inappropriate that such a group be affiliated with or supported by this University, its administration or student body. At minimum, this organization’s certification should be suspended and their conduct reviewed by the Student Organization Resource Center.