It’s a strange concept. One I have never gotten my head around. Getting paid to protest by an organization.
Those in Ferguson were reported to have been paid up to $5,000 a month to loot, riot and attack police. However, tables turned and when the Missourians Organizing for Reform and Empowerment (MORE) declared bankruptcy, the protesters launched their own campaign, and sat-in-protest at the MORE headquarters.
The problem with paid protesting is that it undermines the spontaneity of people uniting for a cause. Uniting for a cause should never be paid for, and really, it begs the question why money is being laid out in the first place.
It’s politics, isn’t it?
Just take a look at the Citizens United decision. And this is where some of the problem stems from. A court ruled it acceptable for corporations and labor unions to sway political agendas by any funding means they see fit. Don’t think for a second this was to benefit the citizen. It’s right there in the nutshell.
“The court said that because these funds were not being spent in coordination with a campaign, they ‘do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption.'”
And this is where I have the problem with it. Lining up a project to stir up a potential change…but if you must get paid for it…I can’t quite grasp the concept. Sorry.
If you must be motivated to protest via the dangling carrot (money) then the protest is void. A protest is meant to be about solidarity, unity and the people – not capitalism. It’s meant to be about change – not lining the pockets of an organization who has been paid by higher ups to pay the protester to change the political winds.
To me, it is blatantly immoral.
I also must highlight instigators and troublemakers high in the food chain – George Soros and his NGO Open Society Foundation (OSF) being one of them. Recently, Soros has experienced exile from his own home country, Hungary, along with Macedonia and also Russia. The governments have purged his OSF for a variety of reasons, most notably though, a threat to national security.
The OSF is, according to the TIMES, one of the major contributors in paying activists to protest in certain events in hopes of swaying political favour. Ferguson, Baltimore, anti-Trump rallies; yes, there are genuine protestors there, but there are also the employed ones to undermine the genuine intentions.
A protest is about rights, about liberty and about fraternity. All the concepts that came from the French Revolution. Freedom of speech, freedom to think…not marred by capitalism.
If the cause is worthy then people will protest. If they don’t protest, they then reap what they sow.
Where is the integrity?
But saying that, if one has been employed to protest, then the protester must get paid. So, in the spirit of things, I must shelve my bias. For those who weren’t paid for their protests, the likelihood was this intention. Men like Soros, those who have a political agenda – who organize these demonstrations with the promise of money – organizations who have millions backing them – I’m sorry, the writing was already on the wall.
It doesn’t make it right, but it certainly balances the karma. Unfortunately, the citizen struggling to pay the bills is caught in the middle…all the while the elite are laughing their asses off.
This article (Paid Protesters Not Getting Paid: Karma or Not?) is a free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Aral Bereux and DNewsHQ.
Supporting Independent & Investigative News is important to us. Please, follow us on Twitter: Follow @DNewsHQ