Friday, June 08, 2007

Embracing Anarchy...


Portland's annual Rose Festival Grand Floral Parade is schedule to commence tomorrow at 10am. And per tradition, groups and families have, over the last several days, taped off areas of downtown sidewalk in reserve for viewing this spectacular event. This practice has gone on for as long as I have lived in Portland, and probably as long as anyone here can remember. If one considers it for a moment, it is an extremely civilized way people have adopted to view the parade, and avoid the chaos of last minute congestion, confusion and conflict.

But all of that ends tonight, compliments of Portland's own alternative class of anarchic lunatics.
The Portland Mercury News has declared war on common civility, promising to send out their thugs tonight to pull up the 'unfair' tape. Calling it "some form of ancient Portland code of ethics, " and backed by Portland city councilman, Randy Leonard, the Mercury News whines, " Rose Parade Tape isn’t 'Fair' !"

So, a self-adopted community standard of organized behavior has now been labeled as an 'ancient Code of Ethics' and then denigrated as such. I should think that any form of ethics, ancient or otherwise should be appreciated by everyone, and most certainly by members of the civil establishment, if they respect the idea of self-government at all. Afterall, the traditional method of accepted reservation is far superior to some Saturday morning mob event whereby people charge downtown at 2am to begin battling for the best viewing locations, clogging streets threatening disorder and promising violence. Is this the nature of fairness Leonard and the Mercury News would prefer? Ask yourselves, then what is it they would actually prefer to common civilty. The answer might be both frightening and obvious.

I submit this as further evidence that what Randy Leonard and the Mercury News respect, is something akin to authoritarianism which dictates which person will get what position; or they desire the chaos of morning riots to lend position... for this family event. Both these choices are obviously anathema to ethics, ancient or otherwise. So ask yourselves, just what system of government does Portland's class of alternative lunatics and civil servants support?


Anonymous said...

Anarchy is a truly ugly sight and I think I saw the worst of it Saturday morning. Two families, one taped off section of sidewalk and one very big territorial conflict. Obviously, one first family had taped off a section of sidewalk to reserve as their personal parade viewing location. During the previous night, somebody pulled up the tape. I suspect the second family claimed the now unmarked site as their own. The first family arriving after the second family found interlopers occupying their previously marked territory. Lawn chairs were flung, adults hit other adults, children jumped and strangled other children, umbrellas got swung, ankles got bitten. It was horrible. And the conflict spread. Other families jumped into the fray. Glass storefronts were broken. Fires were lit. Vandalism and carnage was unleashed and spread throughout the city. Parade floats became rolling torches of burning rose petals. Portland is a ablaze as we speak and will never be the same again. The National Guard has been deployed. It's Detroit 1967 all over again. Oh the inhumanity!

dueler88 said...


My goodness gracious! Where did you see this happen? I've heard nothing about it in the local Portland news! You've got a scoop on your hands! Quick, call Jeff Gianola!

Mr.Atos said...

Obviously the metaphor was a little too vague even for thier own to understand. Next week the thugs should just confiscate homes randomly in Lake O.

Perhaps, Dueler, there is something to be said for those 'ancient forms of ethics' afterall... both in tape and in practice. Would that they were more often respected, we'd need less tape, less fence, less locks, less police, less jails, and less government altogether. But, then who would the Mercury News and Portland's own class of whining sycophants depend on to dictate, 'fairness?' And who would the ethical individual depend on to protect his deliniations of property?!