Re: Anarchists. Which is a crazier response to injustice (perceived or otherwise)

[NightWatcher]

Smashing a window with a brick

or

Demanding that everyone you know, CALL CONGRESS RIGHT FUCKING NOW?


At least the guy with the brick put his ass on the line for what he thinks. No one's going to shoot you with tear gas or a rubber bullet for clogging the Capital Switchboard.


Oh, and for the record, I think neither one gets anything accomplished.

[YOY]

1. I'm no anarchist...but this works better than calling a congressperson or violence, IMHO:

Peaceful but unavoidably there and in your face demonstration. Put your ass on the line without risking someone else's ass.

[NightWatcher]

2. MLK had the right idea...Civil Disobedience

[Tangerine LaBamba]

5. Passive resistance .......

Using your opponent's weight against him.

It's the most powerful way, I agree.

[YOY]

6. and that rubber bullet they shoot at the person "putting his ass on the line"

Has a good chance of hitting someone not doing a thing wrong in the chaos of a protest...thus making the brick thrower kind of a selfish prick in a way.

With passive resistance any violent countermeasures are purely on the aggressor for using them unnecessarily when there is no imminent threat.

Just to point out that things can and most certainly do happen.

[lxlxlxl]

11. that is twisted logic

im not going to bother...

maybe when you outnumber a brick thrower 10 to 1, and you are body armored, and tear gassed up, you dont really need rubber bullets...

SAVE THE WINDOWS!

[YOY]

13. No. It's perfect logic.

and to think otherwise assumes everyone there with you protesting is a shithead who likes to childishly break windows at fast food venues to proove some point...yeah...that'll teach 'em!

[No.23]

43. To be accurate, he advocated nonviolent acts of civil disobedience.

Something that our public schools curiously leave out any mention of, during MLK Day.

He was a major fan of Gandhi too, who advocated the same.

It's important to be precise abut what he advocated.

Nonviolent acts of civil disobedience.

[roughsatori]

7. The Black Panthers did great work for the same cause.

Without a many pronged approach I don't think a major change will happen.

Some Queer activists have perpetrated vandalism to further the cause. More power to them.

Civil-Disobedience here, a few bricks there, probably achieves more than either method on its own.

[YOY]

14. Who has a day named after them? Doctor King or Huey Newton?

Who is beloved worldwide?

Violent protest is for assholes.

[roughsatori]

17. I'm not brave enough to be a pacifist.

Or optimistic enough. One approach does not work.

[YOY]

18. and that non-working approach is unorganized violence.

Dressing up like batman in a ski mask and smashing windows is most certainly "unorganized violence."

[roughsatori]

22. I guess my frustration is that people are upset about bricks when we are in 2 wars abroad.

OH, but that is "organized violence" perpetrated by our government. But yeah, those Anarchists with their bricks are the monsters.

[YOY]

24. Monsters? No. Cheney and crew are monsters. Torturers are monsters. Terrorists are monsters.

Inconsiderate children? Yes. And the perception shared by many (including myself) that they demean the concept of protest as a whole is what many DUers feel.

[roughsatori]

31. Growing up I had to learn to physically fight.

Even into adulthood. I learned to fight well. My perspective is that I have seen violence work as defence. I guess the difference really is that I am willing to grant the protester's violence as a method of defence against unfettered capitalism. You are not. I don't mean to say that I am correct, and I am not trying to be rude or flippant.


I used to date a pacifist. One night we had a date and were to meet on a corner. I was on the other side of the street and saw my date being attacked for being gay by 4 guys in Philly. I ran over and punched the loudest one of them in the face. His mouth was bleeding. I was out of control. The 4 guys took off. I guess it was not worth their effort to fight my "faggot" self. Which is what they screamed when they ran.

My date, immediately broke up with me for my "frightening violence." And I had thought I would be his hero. Sort of funny, really.

We don't all walk in the same shoes. I also believe armed gays don't get bashed.

But I can totally see how violence can be counter-productive.

[Political Heretic]

42. It actually has and does work for them. Provably so.

See my post further down.

[YOY]

46. Bullshit.

Sorry. Angry 15 year olds who call themselves Anarchists with ski masks smashing up McDonalds are not why Europeans have healthcare. That is complete bullshit.

Europeans have the courage to protest is why they have healthcare. Regular unmasked citizens not throwing bricks at percieved "capitalist venues" in some sort of childish effort to "stick it to the man". More likely they will end up hurting someone innocent rather than some evil corporation.

People actually having the courage to protest? Yes, that is a problem we have. Viewed affectiveness of protests? Yes, that is a prioblem we have.

So called "Anarchists" scare away protestors in this country. They are as much of the problem as overzealous cops.

I think you confuse the two.

[Political Heretic]

53. M$M at work

Excellent job at parroting exactly what's fed to you by corporate media about protesters.

[YOY]

54. Bullshit tactic. Blaming anyone not convinced that they are parroting the MSM.

Utter fucking pure unmitigated bullshit. It's like saying Micheal Moore's documentaries are untrue because "he's fat."

12 year olds with masks damanging public property are not the reason why European have universal healthcare.

Pluralistic democratic systems that allow for more than a two party clusterfuck. General public willingness to protest PEACEFULLY. More committed senses of social justice. Better educational systems. Restrictions on lobbyists.

Those are reasons.

I don't recall the M$M ever talking about that...most of what I hear from them are inane stories about Britney Spears and other trivial fluff.

If I'm "parroting" anything it would be more than a few years of higher education based upon international political studies...but hey...blame it on CNN (which I really don't watch at all if I can help it) if you want.

You know it too. So kindly stop pretending to be just so much more "in the know" than others who are obiously just "tools of the man" when your arguement is bullshit.

[Political Heretic]

59. Its bullshit because you say it is, using nothing but stereotype and generalizations

provided like propaganda by the M$M on queue.

Mmmm hmmmm... :eyes:

[YOY]

61. Sorry captain "Hip-And-In-The-Know" but the M$M acusation doesn't count for shit.

So tell me...exactly how did 12 year olds dressed like Batman breaking windows at McDonalds give European's healthcare moreso than any of the reasons I stated?

Mmmmmmm hmmmmm....yourself. You've got nothing.

[Political Heretic]

63. The characterization of all protesters as "12 year olds dressed like batman"

Would be a great place to start....

:eyes:

[YOY]

66. Sorry Batman.

Didn't know you'd take offense.

And clearly there are some senior citizens mixed in the group of masked heroes.


Once agin:
So once again. How do these brave noble and selfless vigilantes of justice give any more reason that Europeans have better health care than what I stated?

Furthermore, when exactly does the M$M ever talk about the reasons I just stated as superior to what we have in the states as I did? Usually they tell us why it won't work based on BS reasons from puppets of big Pharma and the insurance companies.

:eyes: <---- hey look! I can do it too! Hilarious, no?!?!?

[Political Heretic]

68. Some senior citizens?

So all protesters are 12 year olds or senior citizens, now?

And just so we're clear, at no point have I argued about what kind of protesting is better or worse than another. But the fact that Europeans take to the streets en mass and resist the oppressive or exploitative practices of their government - be that orderly or disorderly - is the reason they're standards of living are better than ours. Historically they have won rights via rowdy riotous outrage more often than by sitting in circles singing songs. But if that works in the future, great. If its tried and it doesn't work, then its time to pick up a brick.

Loud protests have often turned confrontational, and they have often been extremely effective. Bolivia is one example, in the days of Bechtel and water privatization, our own American history mostly prior to the twentieth century specifically in labor battles. History of social change benefiting the masses has more examples of change coming out of active, sometimes destructive, sometimes violent resistance to tyranny.

So again, I'm not arguing that aggressive resistance to tyranny is objectively better than non-violence or something else. I'm saying I align myself with those resisting institutional oppression, even if they're not "sophisticated." I'd rather be standing beside a 12-year old in a batman costume even if that's not my perfect ideal than standing with people inside the building waving money and jeering at the people in the streets. And if some property gets smashed up and some people bump their heads along the way so be it.

When over privileged establishment types get all worked out because someone threw a brick at a window, I tend not to give much of a damn. The bottom line effect of them being in the streets, rowdy or not, vs. America where we all sit on our fat asses and CALL CONGRESS RIGHT FUCKING NOW!!!! even after "Congress" long ago told ordinary people to go fuck themselves... is a more responsive government and better living standards.

[YOY]

72. No. I'm just against the fuck heads dressed up in masks who ruin everything with violence.

You know...the ones who call themselves "anarchists"? THe ones that take a peaceful protest and turn it un peaceful due to instigation themselves or provocateurs? The ones that piss off the cops who may already be looking for an excuse to bust some heads or may just be doing their jobs but either way have to subdue the violence? Those ones.

Or am I being obtuse here?

I am absofuckinglutely for taking the streets en masse. I have done so before.

I am also absofuckinglutely against using violence. Especially violence that doesn't effect the people that need to be effected.

Do you think the socialized medicine came from people taking to the streets in violence against corporations or simply going to the streets in peaceful but meaningful protest? My experience and education show the latter!

The choice of "call congress right now" versus "act like an asshole and throw bricks" is a false one. There are other ways to protest and you know it! There is a peaceful solution and the batman kid isn't a peaceful or productive solution.

[Political Heretic]

74. I think maybe I have a problem with your definition of violence.

... ?

Also to this question:

"Do you think the socialized medicine came from people taking to the streets in violence against corporations or simply going to the streets in peaceful but meaningful protest? My experience and education show the latter!"

Well, my experience and education cause me to disagree, with one caveat - it seems like we need to define what kinds of action you would still place in the category of "peaceful" and when it crosses the line into "violent."

To me, I would never in my life think of throwing a brick at a window as "violence."

[YOY]

77. Destruction of property is violence. Throwing a brick is violence.

Pissing off the cops by destroying property who may be either chomping at the bit or simply doing their jobs into attacking or arresting protestors is asking for more violence.

It doesn't work. It ruins the protest and sweeps up everyone around into chaos and puts people in danger.

In otherwords it's immature and inconsiderate to peaceful protestors.

Carrying signs and shouting? Chanting and singing? Burning in effigy ones own property? Not violence.

[Political Heretic]

81. It actually does work and has worked

And I gave more than a couple examples.

Whether it works BEST - meaning whether something else less violent could have worked better had it been employed, THAT I can't say. You could make an argument about that theory. I'd like to believe that's true.

But if you try to seriously argue that historically violent - using your definition - protest has never worked, you're laughably disconnected with history.

[YOY]

86. For a real revolution sure it works.

Not a bunch of kids with masks who are working out their angst.

Get the rest of the population involved.

And like I said. Take down a corporate headquarter. I'll cheer. Until then...bunch of little kids in masks acting up...much like the child of privilege you claim I am but doing a far stricter penance out of perceived guilt and immature selfish angst.

[Political Heretic]

90. What about the workers who held their boss hostage?

Three different places in Europe now, workers have taken over the building and held their boss hostage until their demands were met.

Example: don't remember which country, but I believe the office was a subsidiary of some sort of Catepillar. There was an announcement that they were cutting 700 jobs. They employees demanded a opportunity to renegotiate and the employer refused. The employees took over the building and took the boss and I believe ten other executives hostage until their demands for negotiation were agreed to.

I don't know what they outcome was, but on its face - yea or nay?

[YOY]

94. France.

We still don't know the outcome as far as I know. I doubt it will be positive but most likely will not end in violence.

And I am rather half-heartedly cheering them on. I don't think they'll do that much...no income is no income. CAT is actually doing really shitty. Not too sure if they've given upper management bonuses or not or whether some of upper management has been given the axe. I really need to read more on the situation.

To compare this with the G20 protests? Apples and oranges. Concrete specific protest and general protests for a plethora of reasons.

Large differences and you know it.

[Political Heretic]

96. What if they broke a computer along the way?

Still feel the same?

[YOY]

98. No. It is still wrong though. They are two different situations.

Ask yourself these questions first:

Were there police standing by to bust heads?

Were there others who were protesting something else nearby to take the blame with them?

Were there non-involved people nearby?

Did the fast food restaurant (with the window) personally affect the lives of those who break it as the company who owns the computer?

Did they do it simply to bring attention?

In the end: What good does breaking the computer OR the window accomplish other than childish destruction?

If you can get an entire (blue and white colar) population to violently revolt then you've got a violent revolution on your hands. When all you've got is a bunch of angry young people who will soon grow out of it...and they will grow out of it...they have been for years...then you've got nothing but trouble.

[Political Heretic]

100. But half the time its violence (as defined) is always wrong and the other half of the time its:

THESE particular protesters are douchbags.

And I'm trying to really get to the heart of which it is.

[YOY]

101. Don't try and play me for a hypocrite.

It's still wrong. I just happen to like it when the corporation doing the misdeed actually suffers at the hands of those who it has done wrong and innocents are not in the line of fire.

Call it schadenfreude or call it sadism. I'm not the one doing it and I still believe it will most likely not have positive outcomes for anyone.

The violence still is wrong. As long as there is a chance at a peaceful solution to resolve things then it should be tried.

[Political Heretic]

103. I'm not. Honest. I just am tryin to see if its more about these protesters

And this:

"I just happen to like it when the corporation doing the misdeed actually suffers and innocents are not in the line of fire."

Is well said.

[YOY]

104. I added something to the middle of that in afterthought.

a rather vital bit.

[Political Heretic]

106. This video link seems relevant

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x291687

[inna]

40. agreed.

personally, i simply do not understand all the faux outrage directed at anarchists, i find it totally misdirected.

[Irreverend IX]

52. Civil disobedience only works against a narrow class of opponents.

Gandhi and King came along at the right times for their nonviolent resistance to make a difference, because they were up against hypocritical opponents who were vulnerable to public humiliation. Some opponents can't be shamed into standing down, and in those cases civil disobedience falls flat.

[YOY]

56. So dressing up like batman and throwing bricks works then?

OKAYYYY!!!




I have been living a lie... :sarcasm:

"Narrow class of opponents." Whatever it takes to convince yourself that there is justification to acting like a child and endangering innocents to make a political point...

[timtom]

57. Anarchy does not mean "violence"

That's just a meme left over from the early 20th century.

[YOY]

58. Tell that to some of those that call themselves "anarchists".

Clearly, I am not the one you need to convince.

[Political Heretic]

65. Violence against windows

:eyes:

The humanity!

[YOY]

67. And innocent bystanders never get wrapped up in the scuffle! Do they?

and the poor workers at those establishments who'll have to clean up the glass. You think the CEOs are gonna do that?

You better stop rolling your eyes. It doesn't make your little stance any better. It just makes you look like a smarmy ass defending something he knows isn't right just for the sake of being right.

And really, why don't you brave souls take down a corporate HQ or two instead of waiting for a protest to ruin? I might actually cheer then. Oh wait! Juvenile tantrums are meant to be done in public for "maximum effect" right. Makes one wonder what kind of "effect" your intent is...

[Political Heretic]

78. What I know is that your position reflects one thing and one thing only:

privilege.

Probably white, comfortably middle class privilege, but that's just a guess.

[YOY]

80. Take a look at the avatar sweetheart.

I've lived harder than you ever will. Gone places you'd never go. Eaten things you'd never eat. Worked in places you'd never work.

Priveledge? I've had a little and fought to give it to those who have not. If you want me to deny it then pffft...go whine to the repigs. They're the ones in denial.

[Political Heretic]

83. Oh right. Right....

The avatar....

ah.

My bad.

Cause being able to join the peace corps really solidifies that lack of privilege thing.

[YOY]

87. So what have you done to make anyone's life better?

Oh yeah...thrown a few bricks with kids dressed like bat man?

ah.

My bad.

Cause being able to act like an immature fuckface really solidifies that justifaction for political violence.

And I actually did make a difference in a few lives. Not an entire nation. Just a few. That's all I was trying to do. I did not waste my time.

[Political Heretic]

91. Excellent. That doesn't really have anything to do with arguing from a position of

middle class, probably white, privilege though.

While I'm certainly thrilled and thankful for your desire to give something back.

[YOY]

97. ACtually being middle class, probably white, privilege though hasn't anything to do with this either

Unless you think it a personal attack. In which case, I won't deny any of it nor that I have had advantages that I wish everyone else had nor will I deny that I have tried to give others who have not had my advantages a leg up.

I am white. I am from middle class. I also have nearly been homeless twice and have paid for my own education. I also grow tired of defending myself on this matter when I have nothing to apologize for.

So let's drop that shall we? Unless you'd like to talk about yourself.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

3. Those people in London aren't anarchists .....

They're a disorganized bunch who are still savvy enough to make sure they act up once the photographers are in place (note the very good photos coming out of London - positioning is all), but they're not anarchists.

They're not objecting the existence of the state, as anarchy would, but, rather, their unfair treatment by the state.

Big difference.

[sam sarrha]

10. theyre Flying Monkeys of the Right Wing, trained in camps to make Peaceful Demonstrations Bad Press

to turn the popular attitude against the causes of Progressives.

they are highly organized and trained Thugs on a mission for the Establishment

[gmoney]

89. Aren't Rush and Fox News and that ilk the anarchists?

All they do is cry about how the gummint is keepin' them downtrodden, and so taxed they can barely be bothered to cash their six or seven figure paychecks.

They'd eliminate the government in a heartbeat if it meant no taxes.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

108. No, they're just whiners

and show-offs and entertainers.

Don't make the mistake of thinking that Billo and Flush have any political smarts at all. They're just professional shit-stirrers who are trying to keep their ratings up, their corporate sponsors happy, and their salaries astronomical.

They are, in fact, the opposite of anarchists, since, without the government, where would they be?

You're taking them seriously, which is an error because they need to have something to rail against, and without the government, they'd be lost.

[Bicoastal]

4. Yeah, but who has to pay for the window?

Who has to clean up the pieces, and then order, deliver, carry in, and install a new one?

People who do such things are really only thinking of themselves and their own "issues." And in my book, such extreme egotism is closer to insanity than asking people to "CALL CONGRESS RIGHT FUCKING NOW!!!1!"

[Fumesucker]

12. Actually in my book neither approach works very well at all..

Calls against the Iraq war were running at 50 or 100 to one to some offices back in 2003, and yet the same Congresscritters mostly voted to give Bushie the green light.

And there were literally millions of protesters against the Iraq war, result: we got war.

We are given the illusion that we have some effect on what the politicians do, I think the effect is minimal at best and most likely very near zero.

[Political Heretic]

8. Smashing a window with a brick is why most Euros have HEALTH CARE

and more vacation, better working conditions, less overall poverty, less child poverty, rising education standards (while ours are falling)... and so on.

They have these things because in Europe government is afraid of the power of its people. If the people don't like something, they actually take to the streets!

[Mojambo]

15. Well said. n/t

[cali]

20. bullshit. it is hardly the reason that most have healthcare in Europe.

[malaise]

23. Ding ding

We have a winner.

[chrisa]

60. Europeans are so brave. Americans are little babies that cower...

At the very sight of our government. Yup. Heard it all before. It's still completely ridiculous.

I love posts like these, because they claim that Americans haven't protested once in recent times, and Europeans are constantly out beating and molding their government. What a great formula to get Universal Healthcare. Let's go downtown and burn down every business we see and ruin all of those struggling peoples' lives so that the government listens to us. Just collateral damage.

[Political Heretic]

62. The proof is in the pudding

:shrug:

[Occam Bandage]

85. Many European countries also have more religion in their politics than we do.

Obviously this means that religion leads directly to health care!

[Occam Bandage]

84. No, it's not. The fact that they vote for left-wing politicians who promise those things is why.

[lxlxlxl]

9. i dont care which one works or doesnt, but i cant stand cheap insulting of protestors

this country is so goddamn pacified, they will complain about other people protesting on their tv.

how the fuck did we as progressives get to where we are without protests? yes this is a messy process, but why are people bothered that a few windows were broken? that whole fucking building should have been emptied.

[Echo In Light]

27. Well put

[blindpig]

16. More power to them.

Fuck the capitalists, the violence they have done to this world is beyond reckoning. Those windows are insignificant and it gets their attention.

If the pansies on this thread had been around in 1776 there wouldn't have been a revolution.

[cali]

19. pansies? take your homophobia someplace else.

the problem with doing something violent in a situation like today's is you put other people who are there to peacefully protest at risk. It's fucking assholery.

[roughsatori]

25. Cali, thanks for calling the poster on the "pansies" comment

I didn't have the energy. I read it and felt like logging out. It was uplifting to read your words of defense. Thanks again.

[cali]

44. you are welcome. I don't get how people on this board can continue

to use that ugly slur.

[blindpig]

26. homophobia?

You cast a wide net, nothing of the sort was intended. Pansies come in every sort of sexual orientation. However this limitation of options which this dogmatic pacifism would burden us with suits the capitalists very well, they have nothing to fear from that. Ya gotta have leverage if yer gonna move anything.

You think that there would have been a New Deal if the capitalists didn't fear a socialists revolution?

[Echo In Light]

29. George Carlin referred to this as the "PUSSIFICATION of America."

Yet I'm pretty sure he wasn't a homophobe.

[blindpig]

30. Well, you know, any excuse for a bash....

It was utterly gratuitous, that poster doesn't like me much. Imagine.

[Echo In Light]

32. It's okay. I'm not well received around here either, haha

[roughsatori]

33. George Carlin was not posting at DU

Context, context, context.

The poster was not in the midst of a comedy routine or hilarious parody.

The use of "pussification", in a DU post, would not be homophobic - it would be misogynistic.

[Echo In Light]

34. Carlin used the medium for social critique, not just to be funny

And the term in question was used by him to accurately describe Americans overall indifference and unwillingness to question authority and take a stand on anything that really matters.

So, yeah, there's your "context."

[roughsatori]

36. The context is DU not an HBO special or a Carlin book.

Never wrote that he was "just" trying "to be funny."

You did not read the thread closely or are being willfully ignorant - or both.

[Echo In Light]

37. And the "context" in which Carlin worked was real life. Do the views of DU posters fit into that...

"Context?"

[ShortnFiery]

50. No, we will not allow "comedy" to enter these blessed doors when "DU Morality Police" are

on the job. :patriot:

[cali]

45. It's long been an anti-gay slur and ONLY that.

pan·sy (pnz)
n. pl. pan·sies
1. Any of various plants of the genera Achimenes or Viola, especially V. tricolor or its hybrids, having flowers with velvety petals of various colors.
2. A deep to strong violet.
3. Offensive Slang
a. Used as a disparaging term for a man or boy who is considered effeminate.
b. Used as a disparaging term for a homosexual man.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/pansy

[ShortnFiery]

49. No, I've called other women "pansies" ... it has morphed to mean WIMPY and GUTLESS.

Character traits that neither you nor I could be accused of. ;)

[cali]

55. wrong. sorry, you're wrong again. duh.

and that's why I posted the definition. And you won't find another that agrees with you. tough.

[ShortnFiery]

48. That is what I woefully dislike about some of "the liberal perspective" WAY too guarded.

We all have faults. The point is that we LEARN from slights and verbal prejudices. We are all products of our environment and we all have flaws. It's how we BEHAVE on those perspectives that is most important.

I'm a woman but I'm sure as hell NO PANSY. :blush: <curtsy and exit stage left>

[ShortnFiery]

47. We must have been raised in the same circles. :-)

A friend of mine and I were on temporary duty at Fort Sam Houston for a Seminar. We were walking on a side street in San Antonio, on a beautiful Spring Day ... and all of a sudden my friend exclaimed, "Oh! Look at the PANSIES!"

I immediately started looking around for effeminate men. :blush:

I apologize. In my defense: I was raised by Rednecks and don't like gardening. But I do try to change and become aware of and guard against developing prejudices. :shrug:

[blindpig]

107. It's funny,

the arbitrary definition of word usage. Must not get out much, limited cultural exposure and all that.

Or mebbe someone who has got it out for me and will grasp any straw, however desperate, to mess with me.

Pretty pathetic.

[alcibiades_mystery]

21. Yup yup

:thumbsup:

(I say this as somebody who's had his ass in the teargas while the very upright liberals preach from their couches about "peaceful" demonstrations, haruumph. Besides, a broken window is not VIOLENCE, unless you consider a pane of glass to be a sentient being...)

[Spike89]

28. Layers are effective as is timing

I'm simply not wired for the quick violence, but I understand that it can be effective. It is a lousy starting point and almost as bad in the middle of a debate, but there comes a point when you're backed against a wall and you've made your case...violence is the last resort. That doesn't make it wrong and I accept that others feel up against the wall way sooner than I would. I do think unthinking blind striking out with violence is assholery, but when people are pushed to violence, it is kinda weak to insist that they be rationally violent.

[blindpig]

38. Ain't nothin' wrong with you. n/t

[anaxarchos]

35. There was a thread on here...

... which reproduced a World Bank assessment that the 2009 Economic Recession would kill 90 million people worldwide - about the equivalent of all of the deaths in WW2. It got a handful of responses.

Today, there are many threads decrying violence to plate glass windows.

If "anarchists" had kicked a dog, there would be a hundred times as many.

Very strange morality for the garden variety American Liberal. It seems beyond "alienated" to me but I'm sure I don't understand some crucial fact.

[blindpig]

39. Don't harsh the buzz

Deference to authority is all the rage. Started early in November. We must have order. Shut up and get in line. War is peace.

[anaxarchos]

41. It's stranger in a strange land time...

"I am not from your country... though I was born here."

If the anarcho-kids started actually eating bankers on the spot, I would think, "well, I can understand that, but they should share the meat with 'emerging markets'."

[Political Heretic]

64. You and I are in complete agreement and you know how much I hate that

:D

[anaxarchos]

69. We'll both have to get over it...

Nothin' like a little reality to reset old "antagonisms" (and "alliances").

[Political Heretic]

70. Aint that the truth.

[dcsmart]

51. both actions are necessary

study the history of the labor movement and you will understand what is needed to get things done.

[G_j]

71. global economic crisis will cause an additional 22 children to die per hour, maybe twice that

according to the World Bank.

just sayin'
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/02/opinion/02kristof.htm...

"..according to World Bank estimates, the global economic crisis will cause an additional 22 children to die per hour, throughout all of 2009.
The World Bank says it’s possible the toll will be twice that: an additional 400,000 child deaths, or an extra child dying every 79 seconds."


******
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article5904637.ece

The Times (London) : Downturn could kill 400,000 children, warns
health expert

March 14, 2009 Saturday
Edition 1
BYLINE: Sam Lister
SECTION: NEWS; Pg. 14

Thousands of women and children are dying as a direct consequence of the economic
crisis, which is already derailing efforts to improve maternal care and cut child death
rates, the head of the World Health Organisation (WHO) has warned.

Speaking to The Times after a meeting of world leaders hosted by Gordon Brown
yesterday, Margaret Chan, director-general of the WHO, said risks posed by the credit
crunch to poor nations were already taking hold.

An estimate of between 200,000 and 400,000 additional child deaths a year caused by the
downturn was "entirely credible", she said, calling on world leaders to show solidarity
and "walk the talk" of funding pledges to poorer nations.

"There is no reason why we should doubt that this will happen if we fail to
act," Dr Chan said.

"Because if we do not, more women will suffer or die because of complications arising
from pregnancy and delivery, and more children will die because of lack of food or
immunisation or poor water and sanitation. It is very clear. Past recessions have ample
evidence to demonstrate the fact." Dr Chan, a member of the Taskforce on Innovative
International Financing for Health Systems, which also includes Mr Brown, Robert
Zoellick, president of the World Bank, and eight other world leaders, added that she had
already encountered evidence of worsening funding problems.

..more..

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

73. The First Obviously.

The first is criminal and completely moronic; which is an often found trait of 'anarchists'.

[Political Heretic]

75. As opposed to the second, which is just ineffective and completely moronic

which is often a found trait of "establishment" types.

[Occam Bandage]

82. I'll take ineffective and sedentary over ineffective, violent, and criminal.

If you're going to be ineffective, the least you can do is not break other people's things in the process.

[leftstreet]

92. Only BARBARIANS would BREAK OTHER PEOPLE'S THINGS

[Occam Bandage]

93. Indiscriminate bombing campaigns are also counterproductive and needlessly violent.

Good analogy.

[Echo In Light]

99. Do you really give a shit about other people's property being broken?

That certainly isn't what I sense fueling your opinions

[Occam Bandage]

105. Not on any more than an abstract level.

I mostly care about the public perception of our cause that such behavior generates, but "what drives Occam Bandage's feelings on violent protesting" is a different question from, "do you believe it is less praiseworthy for someone to be ineffective and destructive or to just be ineffective?"

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

102. Maybe Not COMPLETELY Moronic, But Definitely For The Most Part Ineffective.

[earth mom]

76. We ALL need to stop paying taxes. That will fix this shit in a nano second. nt

[Occam Bandage]

79. "Which is a crazier response to your girlfriend leaving you: raping her or calling her a bitch?"

[Jennicut]

88. I'm all for protesting and sending bricks through bankers windows (they deserve it)

but most of the police are just doing their jobs. The real enemies sit behind security and protection and never get touched. I am not even talking about the politicians but the rich sobs that really own some countries. I don't think these people are afraid of this one bit really. They are afraid when there are certain leaders in the govt. willing to change some things. Of course, these people set themselves up to possibly be assassinated.
Pure Capitalism is ugly. Heck, I am not violent by nature but I would through some bricks out of anger and frustration while knowing it does not do much.

[Occam Bandage]

95. A brick through a window ain't gonna make the bankers cry.

Those windows are insured, and insurance pays for repair by adjusting its premiums on the public. In impact, it's only marginally different from throwing a brick through a library window.