The face is none other than Ben Aubin, a North Carolina native who migrated to New Haven by way of Portland, Oregon and began his involvement in New Haven as the self-proclaimed 'founder' of the Freestore, which was supposed to last until at least October but which folded around August.
This is a video that includes Ben Aubin, claiming that the freestore was moving, a promise which ultimately he could not deliver.
Profile of an "Anonymous Protestor" : Ben Aubin's Blog.
Here's Ben Aubin's blog. It's called "Rule By The Rich" and it mentions "The Importance of Affluence" as well as "The Power of Wealth." Here's a sample:
"The only way out now is through an unspoken election. Each member of the collective begins competitively testing presentation methods for gaining the attention and acceptance of the Early Adopters. Whomever achieves success first is the decided leader."
-Ben Aubin Quote
The only problem with such an "unspoken election" is that it's not actually democratic of only those that are "in the know" are able to actually vote, and the system described in that paragraph represents the kind of despotism one might expect from humans in eras predating language. The trouble with anarchy is that it will result in merely a re-shuffling of the same system which many have come to know as the private monopoly of wealth which relates back to individuals who inject wealth into Capital Hill to get what they want. If by co-opting movements first, even if by accurately predicting the occurrences of movements like #OWS, people like Ben are merely interlopers who are out for their own gain, even if it means taking positions of leadership now so they can sell out everybody later and then in all likelihood move to another town. vicinity, so that they can not be held accountable.
The best argument against anarchy is that if we live in a society which has laws, but the laws are either manipulated or not followed, or if money has the ability to influence legislature, then we already live in anarchy and running things further in the ground will not actually help the situation improve.
The best way of accomplishing the unstated goals of #OWS, which seem to be social progress, would be to infiltrate legislature legally with elected leaders who represent the "99%" which demographically would make any #OWS supporter instantly electable, and then once a majority is reached, repeal laws and create new antitrust legislation to shift the balance in favor of individuals, and not corporations.
Here's another quote which relates to what this website advocates, taken from Ben Aubin's blog:
"This kind of competition, however, is a collective of independently acting individuals, working with private information, sharing the results of their actions. "
Another thing about the NH Independent Article, as well as many #Occupy mentions in the news, is the adherence among protestors to hide their identity. As if they're doing something wrong. There's nothing wrong or illegal with protesting. Therefore there should be no reason to conceal ones' identity, unless trying to appeal to appeal to an imaginary audience of impressionable future followers. The most disconcerting part about tents appearing anywhere is that the people living in that town do not know the occupier's identities, weapons permits, criminal records, or psychological status. As with any new residents of any area, all of this information should bear relevance as New Haven, and many other metropolitan centers, welcome their new tent-dwelling neighbors into areas occupied as semi-permanent establishments.
One last quote, to tie everything together:
"For the first time in our history every individual will say with great pride, we are and forever will be ruled by the rich."
What does that mean??!!
Geopolitics on the Horizon
The most interesting thing about the global economy is how it's all tied in to crude oil extraction, because without it, everything pretty much comes to a grinding hault. The United States imports 9 to 12 million barrels of oil per day. Most international news trends towards indicating that the future will be more unstable than the present. The #Occupy protests, admittedly in the NH Independent article, were announced by Canadian magazine "Adbusters."
Therefore, all the money in the world won't help anyone if some event disrupts the transport of oil to the United States, even for a period greater than 6 months. The world has only been dependent on fossil fuels since really after World War II, where the automobile allowed society to spread into the suburbs, made it possible to produce hydrocarbon byproducts like plastics which now clutter our landfills and oceans, and now has become our achilles heel. Such an event might include the election of another Republican president who might lead us into battle with Iran, which many have said has been green-lighted since the last Bilderberg conference, as evidenced by the constant flow of mentions in the propagandist corporate news machine of an Iranian clandestine nuclear program's existence, reminiscent of the WMD reports about Iraq which preceded the 2003 Invasion.
Meanwhile, China and Russia both have made it clear that an invasion of Iran would need clearance by all five permanent members of the UN Security Council, which includes both nations. It's uncertain why the United States would be so interested in pursuing this avenue, at least evidenced by the mainstream news as a priority threat at the moment, if not to preemptively defend Israel, whose own security has been compromised by the political destabilization of the Middle East, including rising tensions with previously peaceful states like Turkey.
These same saber-rattling "1%ers" welcome the civil unrest, because political instability makes it easier for them to take control of situations while people are pre-occupied with the domestic threat: an huge mass of financially discontented citizens who have only strategized political passive aggression, and make their presence known on the news when abused by law enforcement, which only adds to people's disenfranchisement about society's cohesion.
So, do the Occupy Wall Street protests actually represent a viable political movement with real plans to seek reparations for the years spent by Americans who are indebted to their student loans, the new fast-track paperwork route to indentured servitude? Or is it just a way for people like these to dress up in masks inside of tents and act like they're in charge of something, hiding or changing their names in the hope that they will become "the affluent" someday?
Ben Aubin has already mentioned that he doesn't like to post comments on articles that are written about him, so it's probable that he won't acknowledge this, nor the other efforts that TownOfNewHaven has made to ask him to explain his position of "leadership" in the #OWS movement, and the direction of the #Occupy movement in general.
Comments?
