So, Takiji, do you think there will be growing tolerance of the "movement" as it grows or less? I know which I believe will occur. The OWS "movement" is not having a bit of effect on the global marketplace. However, it is having an immediate effect on local business people, many of whom are small businesspeople who are losing money hand over fist every day.
"Protesters in Rome smashed shop windows and torched cars as violence broke out during a demonstration in the Italian capital, part of worldwide protests against corporate greed and austerity measures." "Occupy Wall Street participants try to push trough police barricade as the authorities stop them to take their demonstration onto the street on Times Square in New York, on October 15, 2011." "Chicago police say the protesters were told to remove their tents and leave the park when it closed at 11 p.m. When they refused, police began cutting down the tents and making arrests." Just a couple captions from your linked pictures. Nice peaceful demonstrations?
I don't believe I have ever expressed an opinion on the peacefulness issue one way or the other. If I have though, I'm sure you'll find it. Until then you're wasting your time directing comments like these at me.
Movements evolve. The camps could very well be reduced to a small symbolic rallying point in the future. And remember, not all of these people are unemployed. At least around here, many show up on weekends or when they can because they do have jobs. And many of them work for small companies because I think most people do. I don't know if it's hurting small businesses or not. If the people are like me most of them spend their money at small businesses. Seriously, it's only been a couple of months and look what's happened so far. I have no more idea where this will go than you do but it does seem to have struck a chord. Everywhere.
You wouldn't have liked the American Revolution much probably. That was mob activity as far as the Crown was concerned. But that aside, where do you get the mob rule thing?
Major difference there. They had a leader and a specific goal. That is not what is usually referred to as a mob.
Once the revolution got underway and independence was declared THEN they had a goal and even then far from all of the colonists were on board with it. But July 4, 1776 didn't happen over night. Read some colonial history. It was a messy process before during and after.
I am so glad to know that independence was not a goal until they declared it. And further that all of the colonist not being "on board with it" meant that they did not have a leader. I have no clue just how that means it was mob rule.
That's right--the American Revolution did not occur overnight. However, there were years of planning and agitating beforehand. There were learned people who wrote pamphlets and observed, recorded, and analyzed their enemy. They recruited from all walks of life and they . . . actually . . . did . . . something. Did Samuel Adams just sit around watching the British pass the Sugar Act? No, he stood up and protested taxation without representation. Did John Hancock sit idly by, playing the role of aristocrat and wealthy merchant? No, he used his boats for smuggling for the colonies, he stood up against the Sugar and Stamp Acts, and any myriad of actions (the little terrier . . . ). Thomas Jefferson was more than just an educated landowner who dabbled in politics; George Washington was more than just a member of the landed gentry who earned a commission in the British army. And what about wealth? None of the individuals who began the fight for this nation ever said that wealth was a bad thing. Did Benjamin Franklin ever write, "early to bed, early to rise, makes a man healthy and wise? NO. He wrote that it made a man "healthy, WEALTHY, and wise." Wealth is only a bad thing if you're upset that someone else has it. I'm not a big George Orwell fan, but if you haven't already, take a look at "Animal Farm." I think you'll get my meaning.
Tell you what folks. You just keep going back and forth on this one. Beat it and analyze it to death. Just answer me this. When was the last time you saw this many Americans this pissed off?
I'm sorry . . . I thought these forums were supposed to be for debate, discussion, and analysis. Did I miss something?
This is really interesting. Except for a few limited exceptions the protests have been perfectly peaceful. The vast majority of violent actions have been at the hands of the police and government, but it is all the fault of the OWS movement. Out of the protests which have occurred worldwide, how many acts of violence have been at the hands of the police and how many have been at the hands of protesters? How many acts of violence have been performed within the realms of the protesters themselves. I know the answer. Not Many. The protesters have worked very hard to make their actions non-violent and the majority of violent acts have been from outside the movement itself. In addition, many people are advocating an increased level of violence against the protesters. Arrest them all. Bring out the fire hoses. Rubber bullets. Pepper spray. Yay. Teach em a lesson. The question you really have to ask is "who started the violence?" The answer is that the forces of government did.
There was most definitely an interesting article in the New York Daily News this morning. It highlights the multiple requests for assistance from police forces in handling actual disruptive and criminal elements. The general answer from the police departments is extreme apathy and "deal with it yourself." I know how it ended up in Tennessee. The governor said, "no because we don't have enough police" and then passed an unconstitutional curfew and called in 75 police officers to arrest people. The forces of the powerful are activating and you can bet they will get more desperate. Occupy Wall Street protesters at odds with Mayor Bloomberg, NYPD over crime in Zuccotti Park
Except for the first article ask yourself who actually initiated the violence. Who decided to act unconstitutionally against the people's right to protest with barriers and violence designed to keep them quiet.
As fond as you are of demanding proof, I'll turn the tables here & ask that you back up this assertion.
