They either suppress memory or deny knowing... all of us probably have fed into 
such cruelty... all of us resist remembering such.
 
On Mar 18, 2013, at 12:41 AM, Glenn moyer wrote:

> You're welcome. After reading the essay and comparing it to what happened in 
> Clark Park, I hope that people remember the extreme efforts that the leaders 
> of the Fiends of Clark Park and UCD made to keep all "planning" meetings 
> invitation only, year after year! 
>  
> FOCP and UCD would not allow any transparency for any of their redesign 
> plans, telling us to give them money and "put our money where our mouths 
> are."  And they mercilessly attacked my character for insisting upon open 
> inclusive meetings and even defied their own membership regarding 
> notification of meetings and agendas in the UC Review.  Of course, if they 
> had told the truth about their "vision" for privatizing Clark Park, neighbors 
> would have rejected it outright.  But they insisted that we go to their 
> deceptive dog and pony shows, and either thank them or shout out our "wish 
> lists" in 1 minute bursts like good consumers.  All of that was a bullshit 
> smokescreen to cloak their true privatization agenda.
>  
> The mistake people made was remaining silent about exclusivity and secrecy!  
> Whenever antidemocratic processes are demanded for decisions appropriate for 
> all citizens, you can be certain it includes the unacceptable.  The ends 
> justifies the means in the name of efficiency is asserted, and viscious 
> attacks are waged against dissenters to the secrecy, just as i experienced.  
> Too many consumers were tickled pink by the call for my suicide and use of 
> the death ray that they stayed silent whne the processes before them should 
> have been completely rejected! 
>  
> (With Aaron Swartz dead and plans to kill or permanently silence Bradley 
> Manning and Julian Assange, the antics of the barking cheese gang might not 
> seem so funny or harmless to all of the good people any longer.  They also 
> may understand the role of censorship with the pretense of "civility" 
> somewhat differently than they did when Penn sponsored UCNeighbors while 
> their operatives tried to make this public list intolerable.)
>  
> http://newdemocracyworld.org/old/space.htm
>  
>  
> 
>  
>  
> -----Original Message----- 
> From: Richard Conrad 
> Sent: Mar 17, 2013 10:07 PM 
> To: Glenn moyer 
> Cc: [email protected] 
> Subject: Re: [UC] Privatizing the public realm, link 
> 
> Like it Glenn!  Thanks!!
> 
> 
> On Mar 17, 2013, at 8:33 PM, Glenn moyer wrote:
> 
>> Here is a very short excellent essay by a landscape architect in Boston, 
>> Privatizing the Public Realm.  I hope some middle class consumers still have 
>> the ability to read an entire page.
>>  
>> Our city hall plaza belongs to the center city district, the parkway is a 
>> venue for exclusive Budweiser festivals, and Clark Park will now be Tony 
>> West's beer garden.    It's hard to know if more than a couple of people out 
>> there have started to connect the dots between school closures, the AVI 
>> corporate windfall, the gentrifications, the police state, and the 
>> privatization of all public spaces; with the shift to corporate 
>> totalitarianism. ( The introduction of university sponsored censorship, 
>> several years ago, has had the planned chilling effect on this list and 
>> political speech in the neighborhood. )
>>  
>> If the bewildered local gentry ever starts to wake up to the real world, 
>> they will need to understand how their abandonment of principles was studied 
>> by elite business universities, like the Wharton University, and signaled 
>> middle class readiness for corporate enslavement!  Our upscale village 
>> paradise was a very important pilot study!
>>  
>>  I've blown the whistle on this privatization process since the late 1990s, 
>> but most of the neighbors were busy laughing at my tin foil hat and the 
>> incessant ad hominem attacks from our "community leaders." 
>>  
>> I hope some locals can wake up and understand the reality of the world they 
>> thought they wanted.
>> 
> 
> 

Reply via email to