# Glenn Becks targets Frances Fox Piven (of "Cloward-Piven"); "targets" fitting word **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [January 21, 2011, 7:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glenn-becks-targets-frances-fox-piven-of-cloward-piven-targets-fitting-word/568430 "2011-01-21T07:55:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Milossarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/3ec8ea/32.png) [@Milossarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Milossarian)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2011, 7:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glenn-becks-targets-frances-fox-piven-of-cloward-piven-targets-fitting-word/568430/121 "2011-01-28T07:49:11Z")
_FRANCES FOX PIVEN: Well, I think that there’s a certain amount of just accident that he picked me or picked Richard and me, partly accident, partly not so accidental, because there were at the time, in the late 1960s, early 1970s, there were a number of people who had moved from being on the left, further to the left than me, who were moving to the right, where the pay is better. And in making that move, they sort of took with them their familiarity with the work that we had done **and then exaggerated, demonized it**. You know, I think that—_ [Here’s](http://www.indycons.net/Documents/ClowardPiven.pdf) an example of Mrs. Piven’s work. Hopefully providing it directly doesn’t exaggerate it or demonize it. Why would anybody be opposed to intentionally overwhelming the welfare system to cause a “profound financial and political crisis” in America so you can bring about “wealth redistribution” and a “guaranteed annual income” for everybody? A guaranteed income provided by magic, or the federal government, or something. These are the smart people that some of you apparently revere. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2011, 8:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glenn-becks-targets-frances-fox-piven-of-cloward-piven-targets-fitting-word/568430/122 "2011-01-28T08:01:17Z")
> [@Milossarian](#): > > Yes, original poster, somebody should DO SOMETHING. > > Because Beck criticized the far-left idiocy advocated by Piven, and some unstable dumbasses later gave her death threats, clearly it’s Beck’s fault. > > Maybe we should arrest everybody who criticizes liberals’ bad ideas. Or at least shut them down so no one can hear them. > > Or, maybe – and I’m just spit-balling ideas here – we could hold the people who make violent threats responsible for their actions. And let whoever wants to criticize whomever have at it. > > And would I put it past lefty haters of Beck to do that on his web site? [Why no, no I wouldn’t.](http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/whos-behind-the-crash-the-tea-party-website/) Criticizing bad ideas generally doesn’t involve calling for shooting people in the head. You’d realize that if you weren’t a knee-jerking idiot. ---
**Author:** ![Milossarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/3ec8ea/32.png) [@Milossarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Milossarian)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2011, 8:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glenn-becks-targets-frances-fox-piven-of-cloward-piven-targets-fitting-word/568430/123 "2011-01-28T08:33:06Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > Criticizing bad ideas generally doesn’t involve calling for shooting people in the head. You’d realize that if you weren’t a knee-jerking idiot. Did Beck call for shooting Piven in the head? Did I say the people who are making violent threats should be held accountable for their individual actions? Work on your reading comprehension. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2011, 8:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glenn-becks-targets-frances-fox-piven-of-cloward-piven-targets-fitting-word/568430/124 "2011-01-28T08:42:33Z")
> [@Milossarian](#): > > Did Beck call for shooting Piven in the head? Maybe you should watch the clip? > [@](#): > > Did I say the people who are making violent threats should be held accountable for their individual actions? What about the guy stirring up the mob? > [@](#): > > Work on your reading comprehension. It’s tough to gear down to your level. I’m trying my best. ---
**Author:** ![bengangmo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@bengangmo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bengangmo)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2011, 9:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glenn-becks-targets-frances-fox-piven-of-cloward-piven-targets-fitting-word/568430/125 "2011-01-28T09:18:07Z")
> [@DoctorJ](#): > > I have a lot of friends who are lefty activists (in environmental matters, mostly) and regularly participate in acts of civil disobedience\*. When you see a bunch of people getting arrested at an anti-moutaintop removal rally, odds are I know most of them. > > It surprises me how much time and energy they put into training both themselves and their peers to do it right. They focus on ways that they can be disruptive enough to get their point across and not so much that the disruption outweighs that point. And the biggest focus of their training is how to keep things from getting out of hand and turning ugly. Most of these people are dedicated pacifists, but beyond that they know that a single act of violence or significant property damage undermines everything they’re trying to do. > > At most of these events I’ve been around, people like them make up the overwhelming majority. > > My point is that well-trained activists like these would strive to create a demonstration that might “look like” the ones in Greece, that would definitely be disruptive, and that would carefully target the disruption to maximize impact, but they would also be fighting like hell to make sure violence didn’t happen. I also suspect that is pretty well understood when they talk among themselves, so that they don’t feel the need to clarify that they’re not endorsing violence. > > - I’m told they prefer “civil noncompliance”, because “only slaves and servants are ‘obedient’”. This is very accurate. I remember taking part in a protest at my university in my younger days. We essentially chased our Misiter for Education around a university campus, blockaded his car, and chanted at him. The guy that tried to let air out of his tyres was physically restrained. Why? Well that act would have transformed us from “legimate protesters” into “unruly rioters”. Good thing too - the Minister came off looking like an idiot on national news, while the protestors amply made their point. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2011, 9:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glenn-becks-targets-frances-fox-piven-of-cloward-piven-targets-fitting-word/568430/126 "2011-01-28T09:41:57Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > You’re assuming her “like” is supposed to apply to size and size only. That seems like more than a stretch. No, I’m not. Others in this thread may have, but not me. Rather, it looks to me like you’re conflating a statement of fact with an endorsement. It is quite true that in order to actually affect government policy public protests must be large, widespread and highly emotional (if not actually violent). To achieve their goals (assuming they have them) they need to reach a point at which it is unsafe for politicians to ignore them. To say that is not to say that I think people should riot (I don’t, except in \*very \*extreme circumstances which don’t remotely apply in modern America). It is also not to say that I think politicians should acquiesce in the face of a few peaceful protests; it would be wrong for a few rabblerousers to affect the course of government appointed by the majority. It is simply a recognition of the way things work in America. > [@Milossarian](#): > > Here’s an example of Mrs. Piven’s work. Hopefully providing it directly doesn’t exaggerate it or demonize it. > > Why would anybody be opposed to intentionally overwhelming the welfare system to cause a “profound financial and political crisis” in America so you can bring about “wealth redistribution” and a “guaranteed annual income” for everybody? A guaranteed income provided by magic, or the federal government, or something. > > These are the smart people that some of you apparently revere. I’m not denying that what she is proposing is extreme. But please note that it is also entirely **legal**. I see her line of reasoning as this: 1. The current welfare system is inefficient and ineffective. 2. The government’s solution to this is to discourage people _who are legally eligible for benefits_ from applying for them, even though this inflicts a real hardship on those people. 3. If we make sure that all those people who are eligible for benefits sign up, the flaws in the system will become evident. 4. [del]Profit![/del] The government will be forced to implement a more efficient, effective and equitable welfare system that isn’t reliant on attempting to trick people into not claiming what they are allowed under the system. Bearing in mind that this is 1966 and we have the benefit of hindsight, her proposal strikes me as overly optimistic about the way that government works. But it’s not poorly reasoned and when you dig down to the details what she’s asking for is not out of line with what you get in a lot of countries: basic assistance for food and rent, and special “non-recurring” grants for clothing and basic furniture. Yes, she wants “a new program for direct income distribution”. That makes her a proper liberal (which was much closer to the center in 1966 than it is now, especially in light of Lyndon Johnson’s “War on Poverty”). It doesn’t make her an anarchist. She wants to use the system to fix it, hardly the action of a violent revolutionary. In fact that article you cite goes on to describe the likely political and economic ramifications of her plan, how it might fail and what alternate outcomes might be. But go right ahead ACORN-izing another person trying to help the poor. Don’t let facts (or perhaps reading comprehension) stop you. After all, you’ve clearly got a deeper understanding of a “smart person I [del]have never heard of before[/del] revere” than I do. > [@Cloward-Piven](#): > > Conservative Republicans are always ready to declaim the evils of public welfare, and they would probably be the first to raise a hue and cry. Hmmm… ---
**Author:** ![Milossarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/3ec8ea/32.png) [@Milossarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Milossarian)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2011, 9:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glenn-becks-targets-frances-fox-piven-of-cloward-piven-targets-fitting-word/568430/127 "2011-01-28T09:54:01Z")
> [@A Monkey With a Gun](#): > > Are you shitting me? [Here](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQcvbw6ExTQ) is a clip from his show where he says, “you’re going to have to shoot them in the head”. How 'bout putting that statement into the context in which it was said. Beck was contending that the Democratic Party is playing a dangerous game by using far-left radical revolutionaries to help achieve political aims. And his point was that the Democrats will never be able to placate or satisfy said revolutionaries, who will likely take a violent turn. “You (the Democrats) are going to have to shoot them (the radical revolutionaries) in the head. But they may shoot you first.” But way to warp that into Beck calling for shooting people. Media Matters would be proud of you. As for Beck’s comment about Michael Moore, there’s no excusing it that I can see, and he shouldn’t have said it. He’s got to learn to not let far-left loons frustrate him to the point of saying such things. This web site helped me to achieve that enlightenment long, long ago. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Milossarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/3ec8ea/32.png) [@Milossarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Milossarian)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2011, 10:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glenn-becks-targets-frances-fox-piven-of-cloward-piven-targets-fitting-word/568430/128 "2011-01-28T10:10:37Z")
**Gyrate:** > [@](#): > > Yes, she wants “a new program for direct income distribution”. That makes her a proper liberal (which was much closer to the center in 1966 than it is now, especially in light of Lyndon Johnson’s “War on Poverty”). It doesn’t make her an anarchist. She wants to use the system to fix it, hardly the action of a violent revolutionary. [Mrs. Piven, from way back in late December 2010](http://www.thenation.com/article/157292/mobilizing-jobless): \*An effective movement of the unemployed will have to look something \*\*like the strikes and riots that have spread across Greece \*_in response to the austerity measures forced on the Greek government by the European Union, or like the student protests that recently spread with lightning speed across England in response to the prospect of greatly increased school fees._ Um, have you seen footage of what’s been going on in Greece? That sounds a bit like anarchy. That sounds a bit like calling for violent, revolutionary action. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2011, 10:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glenn-becks-targets-frances-fox-piven-of-cloward-piven-targets-fitting-word/568430/129 "2011-01-28T10:28:01Z")
> [@Milossarian](#): > > That sounds a bit like anarchy. That sounds a bit like calling for violent, revolutionary action. Read my response to **magellan01** , just above my response to you. ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2011, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glenn-becks-targets-frances-fox-piven-of-cloward-piven-targets-fitting-word/568430/130 "2011-01-28T16:54:15Z")
> [@Milossarian](#): > > Beck was contending that the Democratic Party is playing a dangerous game by using far-left radical revolutionaries to help achieve political aims. And his point was that the Democrats will never be able to placate or satisfy said revolutionaries, who will likely take a violent turn. > > “You (the Democrats) are going to have to shoot them (the radical revolutionaries) in the head. But they may shoot you first.” Do you know who ELSE falsely accused his opponents of using far-left radical revolutionaries to violently achieve political aims? No, seriously, just because you fantasize that your opponent is violent, doesn’t excuse your violent mindset. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Tooth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c67d28/32.png) [@The\_Tooth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Tooth)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2011, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glenn-becks-targets-frances-fox-piven-of-cloward-piven-targets-fitting-word/568430/131 "2011-01-28T19:40:13Z")
“You are going to have to shoot them in the head” isn’t calling for some people to shoot others in, say, the head? I won’t touch the ‘far left’ nonsense because everyone knows that the American right’s definition of ‘leftist’ is ‘people who don’t believe the garbage we spew’. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2011, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glenn-becks-targets-frances-fox-piven-of-cloward-piven-targets-fitting-word/568430/132 "2011-01-29T16:09:49Z")
The problem with Sam Stone’s argument, if you can call it that, is that the rhetoric we are objecting to specifically calls for violence, while Piven’s quote only implies it. If what Piven said was the worst that anyone on the right had said, I wouldn’t bat an eye. I’m sorry, but telling people to become more forceful in their rioting is not the same thing as giving fake poison to your opponent’s look-alike. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2011, 11:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glenn-becks-targets-frances-fox-piven-of-cloward-piven-targets-fitting-word/568430/133 "2011-01-31T11:56:54Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > I’m sorry, but telling people to become more forceful in their rioting is not the same thing as giving fake poison to your opponent’s look-alike. She’s not even telling them to do it, not in that quote anyway. ---
**Author:** ![Lightnin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lightnin/32/180_2.png) [@Lightnin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lightnin)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2011, 12:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glenn-becks-targets-frances-fox-piven-of-cloward-piven-targets-fitting-word/568430/134 "2011-01-31T12:56:07Z")
> [@Milossarian](#): > > That sounds a bit like anarchy. That sounds a bit like calling for violent, revolutionary action. I dunno- it sounds to me as if she’s saying that any sort of protest _which doesn’t go as far as the riots in Greece did_ will simply be ineffectual. Hardly a call to violence; more like a recognition of the powerlessness of the unemployed. As calls to violence go, this one is remarkably passive and nonspecific. It’s funny that the Right keeps pointing towards this quote as an example of Piven advocating violence, when they can’t seem to recognize when those on the Right call for it openly. ---
**Author:** ![Clothahump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/51bf81/32.png) [@Clothahump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Clothahump)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2011, 2:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glenn-becks-targets-frances-fox-piven-of-cloward-piven-targets-fitting-word/568430/135 "2011-01-31T14:03:08Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > [No need to imagine](http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2011/1/21/937651/-Becks-call-to-violence:-Shoot-them-in-the-head). Try reading the entire transcript instead of just one snippet taken out of context. Beck is talking about people who believe in something as opposed to those who don’t, and he uses himself as an example, saying that someone will have to shoot HIM in the head to get him to stop. He then uses that same analogy to describe others, and of course, that’s what get quoted. Emphasis mine. > [@](#): > > ``` > You want to know why TV doesn't reflect you? You want to know why Washington doesn't reflect you? Because they don't understand, from the radical revolutionaries to the Islamic extremists and yes, DOJ, they do exist to the tea party movements. > > Just because you in Washington and you who are so out of touch with life in the media, just because you don't believe in something doesn't mean nobody else does. We do. You know why you're confused by this show? It's because I believe in something. You don't. > > **Tea parties believe in small government. We believe in returning to the principles of our Founding Fathers. We respect them. We revere them. Shoot me in the head before I stop talking about the Founders. Shoot me in the head if you try to change our government.** > > I will stand against you and so will millions of others. We believe in something. You in the media and most in Washington don't. The radicals that you and Washington have coopted and brought in wearing sheep's clothing change the pose. You will get the ends. > > You've been using them? They believe in communism. They believe and have called for a revolution. You're going to have to shoot them in the head. But warning, they may shoot you. > > They are dangerous because they believe. Karl Marx is their George Washington. You will never change their mind. And if they feel you have lied to them -- they're revolutionaries. Nancy Pelosi, those are the people you should be worried about. > > Here is my advice when you're dealing with people who believe in something that strongly you take them seriously. You listen to their words and you believe that they will follow up with what they say. > > Didn't we learn that lesson from Osama Bin Laden? I heard his warning in 1998. I said on the air at the time, listen to him. We didn't listen. Germany, the revolutionaries in Russia or Venezuela or Cuba no, no, no. They all have one thing in common. They have all called for revolution. > > They want to overthrow our entire system of government, and their words say it. Why won't you believe it? > > As you will learn on "Founding Fridays(sic)," this Friday, we're talking about James Madison. Here is what you will learn. The revolution of 1776 was a picnic compared to what the revolutionaries of today would like to do. It's not a lot of fun. Usually, millions of people die. > > But I'm glad to see our politicians will co-opt those people so they can have power. Fundamental transformation. It's what America is going through right now. And the progressives, the Marxist revolutionary progressives are still not happy. I'm going to show you the beginning of that civil war inside the Democratic Party, next. > > ``` ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2011, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glenn-becks-targets-frances-fox-piven-of-cloward-piven-targets-fitting-word/568430/136 "2011-01-31T16:00:35Z")
> [@Clothahump](#): > > Try reading the entire transcript instead of just one snippet taken out of context. Beck is talking about people who believe in something as opposed to those who don’t, and he uses himself as an example, saying that someone will have to shoot HIM in the head to get him to stop. He then uses that same analogy to describe others, and of course, that’s what get quoted. Emphasis mine. Not only that, but as I pointed out earlier, he never even insinuates that leaders like Obama, Pelosi, et al, be shot, but that THEY would have to shoot the ideologues from the left who oppose them. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2011, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glenn-becks-targets-frances-fox-piven-of-cloward-piven-targets-fitting-word/568430/137 "2011-01-31T16:09:15Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Not only that, but as I pointed out earlier, he never even insinuates that leaders like Obama, Pelosi, et al, be shot, but that THEY would have to shoot the ideologues from the left who oppose them. Quick question. If Keith Olberman was calling for people to shoot Tea Party members. Who, as it happens, are ideologues on the far right, what would you say? Would it be wrong then? ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2011, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glenn-becks-targets-frances-fox-piven-of-cloward-piven-targets-fitting-word/568430/138 "2011-01-31T16:36:02Z")
That there Beck quote is just full-on crazy. Never mind the “shoot me in the head” stuff, he’s stating outright that Nancy Pelosi, for one, is a Communist revolutionary bent on instigating a civil war in which millions will die in order to overthrow the government. Of course, Glenn Beck is not suggesting for a moment that that people should shoot them pre-emptively, but of course the good people of Germany, Venezuela, Russia and Cuba did nothing and look what happened to them? ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2011, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glenn-becks-targets-frances-fox-piven-of-cloward-piven-targets-fitting-word/568430/139 "2011-01-31T16:41:15Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > Quick question. If Keith Olberman was calling for people to shoot Tea Party members. Who, as it happens, are ideologues on the far right, what would you say? Would it be wrong then? Yes. And if Beck said it, it would also be wrong. But I don’t think that’s what was done here. I think Beck was simply making a point about the level that certain people are driven by ideology. He’s calling for people to realize that certain groups will not be satisfied with any compromise, that you must ignore them, because reasoning with them is futile. That the only way that they will give up on their mission is if they are shot. Now, a question for you: do you think Beck instructed anyone to shoot anyone else? If so, please explain who, according to Beck’s words,is to do the shooting and who is to be shot. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2011, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glenn-becks-targets-frances-fox-piven-of-cloward-piven-targets-fitting-word/568430/140 "2011-01-31T17:03:36Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > I think Beck was simply making a point about the level that certain people are driven by ideology. He’s calling for people to realize that certain groups will not be satisfied with any compromise, that you must ignore them, because reasoning with them is futile. That the only way that they will give up on their mission is if they are shot. :rolleyes: **Beck** said that?! People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw pots and kettles. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glenn-becks-targets-frances-fox-piven-of-cloward-piven-targets-fitting-word/568430.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glenn-becks-targets-frances-fox-piven-of-cloward-piven-targets-fitting-word/568430.md?page=8)