In my opinion protestors are committing a sort of idealistic martyrdom. It’s not about finding a practical solution, it’s about being right.
Look I’m right! Carrot juice is murder!
It’s not that they actually believe they are going to get their way.
For example:
Coercion is a powerful tool that is used against us in our everyday lives (advertising, newspapers etc.) and I think if there was less coercion we wouldn't have allot of the problems that lead people into committing violent acts (poverty, lack of hope).
Also, right now the tools aren't in the hands of a functioning democratic society they're in the hands of a select few who are also the benefactors of said coercion and influence and to me that's the vital component. I'm all for Neighborhood Watch. This brings up the critical issue which is who are the police really there to protect, the citizens or the system?
If in all seriousness the government said, “You anarchists are right. In a cost-cutting measure, we are disbanding the police and replacing it with Neighbourhood Watch” the protestors would crap themselves.
OK, game on! Disband the cops! Now you are finally free!
Sure, three meth-heads are in your alley smashing stuff and breaking into sheds. But just go out there in your hemp sandals and have a “dialogue?”
Please … just do us a favour and bring a video camera so we can all have a laugh.
Oh, right, if we got The Sinister White Men in Suits TM out of power, all human sin would evaporate. There would be no more greed, addiction, extortion, abuse, violence … it would all vanish.
Do you really think violence started when someone invented the advertising jingle?
Of course you don’t, but it’s much simpler to separate society into the ‘clever and educated who know better’, the ‘unwitting dupes of the system’ and ‘Dick Cheney.’
In my mind, it’s a fearful reaction to a complex world. Rather than grind it out and come up with practical solutions, you build a wall of sanctimonious idealism around you.
‘I’m too clever to be a victim.’
It’s fantasy. Idealism is all well and good, but it becomes dangerous when you actually try to hamper public policy to conform with impossible goals.
At their root, all fanatics are idealists.
Here is some idealism, for example
I'm protesting because I'm against the military manifestation of Canada's foreign policy. This thread highlights how contentious the issues are; to me, the big missions on which members of Canadian military institutions are currently deployed are at best ineffective, and at worst highly damaging.
I definitely support a presence in nations attempting to build stability and sustainable infrastructure. That may be one aspect of what we're doing, but I think the negatives greatly outweigh the positives in our case. Western nations have a history of "help" that is domineering and unproductive.
I don't want soldiers to die, but nor do I want anyone else to. I'm not a pacifist and I believe a defensive body is necessary. If we executed truly humanitarian and defensive missions, I would favour training! And the argument that this is preëmptive defense is completely wrong to me.
You are” not a pacifist and believe a defensive body is necessary.” Good. It’s called NATO.
Afghanistan isn’t preemptive, it’s reactive.
So when some knobs … say … murder thousands of innocent people without warning you hunt them down and kill them.
All of them. Without mercy. Unless they surrender unconditionally and mean it.
Am I angry? You bet I am.
I am so sick of ‘murderers and scumbags’ (and if you call the perpetrators of September 11 anything else, we do have a problem) being protected by the hand-wringing and navel gazing of people who are so afraid to admit that evil exists.
Do you know why so many people died in Yugo from ’92 to ’95?
Because the UN was hampered by political tenderfooting. They didn’t want to offend anyone at little places like Srebrenica. Don’t take my word for it, ask almost anyone who was there. Slaughter was happening, the whole world knew it, but we wanted to be “defensive and humanitarian” and thousands died that didn’t have to.
Why was there no Western intervention in Rwanda in ’94?
It’s because our politicians were scared of political fallout from left-wing protestors. They’d just got their fingers burned in Somalia, and couldn’t face another drop in the opinion polls.
Different tragedy, same outcome.
Do you know what stopped the massacres in both countries?
Applied military force.
You do not live in a vacuum.
Protestors do have an effect.
Keep it up, you may just get us out of Afghanistan. Take a bow when it happens.
The army will no doubt make a mistake and you will be there to jump all over it and ignore all the good work that has gone on.
Politicians will sniff an opportunity and embrace your cause.
If you get your way, the army will come home in ‘disgrace,’ Afghanistan will fall back into chaos, and Al-Qaeda will laugh and start planning the next big one.
Oh, and they don’t mess around with water cannons and pepper spray, like the ‘fascists’ you are used to.
Oh, wait, just go and explain to them that you are ‘too clever to be duped by the system.’
They will totally see your point, man.
And then they’ll blow your ass up.
But deep, deep down you know that already. Deep down, I suspect, you feel as long as you keep blaming those who you know won’t strike back (our professional and disciplined police and army) you feel a sense of control, accomplishment, and courage.
Enjoy it. It’s called freedom.
Don’t worry, we’ll pick up the tab.
