- 19 Jul 2009 18:17
#13098891
You make a fundamental false claim that the protesters don't have an alternative or believe in anything other than protesting.
They are often asked and respond in certain cases, but when protests turn violent (whether the police are at fault which is often the case of the protesters turn violent) then it's painted as something quite differently by the media.
And your charactertures of the protesters is nothing but a false cheap ad homenuim and offers nothing to the discussion.
What are you talking about? Even Anacrhists tend to not start violence at protests. For example in Seattle, it is quite accepted that the police were at fault (as was the case with DNC 1968).
These are indeed peaceful protests.
The 1999 Seattle protests already significantly altered the framework of the globalization debate in America i would say.
And to posit that the protesters don't have alternatives is against quite laughable and quite the opposite: they have quite a few alternatives to the system of global capital.
NYYS wrote:You know that no one else takes these things seriously? When something "bad" happens (bad in quotes because some teenaged commie getting teargassed is actually pretty funny) it's only a question of whether the police acted too harshly. I have never, ever heard anyone ask what the protesters believe in or why they do what they do. It's always a question of how the police should respond to that behavior.
You make a fundamental false claim that the protesters don't have an alternative or believe in anything other than protesting.
They are often asked and respond in certain cases, but when protests turn violent (whether the police are at fault which is often the case of the protesters turn violent) then it's painted as something quite differently by the media.
And your charactertures of the protesters is nothing but a false cheap ad homenuim and offers nothing to the discussion.
Rojik wrote:I hope that they get baton charged, tear gassed, beaten senseless and locked up. These idiots who take the right of free speech and peaceful protest to the extreme of attacking police and destroying public property to get try and get the point across that they somehow have the answers to all of societies problems is why I favour a fascist dictatorship. Listen to these people? Only if they are begging for mercy, and only to laugh at it.
What are you talking about? Even Anacrhists tend to not start violence at protests. For example in Seattle, it is quite accepted that the police were at fault (as was the case with DNC 1968).
These are indeed peaceful protests.
What ever the G-8 discusses at it's meetings it won't be changed by those idiots smashing police and destroying property out the front. The sooner the state opens fire on those "people" the better the world will be. Rebels with out an idea is the nicest thing I could say about them.
The 1999 Seattle protests already significantly altered the framework of the globalization debate in America i would say.
And to posit that the protesters don't have alternatives is against quite laughable and quite the opposite: they have quite a few alternatives to the system of global capital.