I don't get anti-globalization protesters

[Frederic Bastiat]

This is what is going down here in downtown Montréal:

http://www.canada.com/montreal/story.asp?id=69DB6618-DBBC-4B6B-A4C0-598D98FB52A8

MONTREAL -- Protests against a World Trade Organization meeting turned violent Monday when bandana-wearing anti-globalization demonstrators smashed windows of downtown stores.

Some of the protesters targeted Gap and Burger King outlets on busy Ste-Catherine Street, tossing objects through their windows.

A Canadian Forces recruitment centre was also vandalized. Police arrested at least four people, and protesters headed further east to regroup. One protest leader said Jaggi Singh, who has been arrested at several international trade meetings, was among those detained.

Another organizer, Stefan Christoff, defended the violence against the stores, saying the Gap is a multinational corporation that runs sweatshops.

"These are very legitimate targets, as the WTO is a legitimate target,'' said Christoff, who denounced the police presence in downtown Montreal as a militarization of the city.



Keep in mind this is the same city where we held by far the biggest anti-war (Iraq) demonstrations in Canada with not a single incident of violence.

What is it about these vandals? Why is this type of knee jerk vandalism part and parcel of every anti-globalization protest?

This will do wonders for the already battered tourism industry.

[Loonman]

1. Hmmm...

I don't either.

Some of the protesters targeted Gap and Burger King outlets on busy Ste-Catherine Street, tossing objects through their windows.

What, exactly, does this accomplish?

[T_i_B]

4. It says "we don't like you" to the corporations

but by the same token it causes a lot of potential sympathisers to keep well away from the protests. It also tends to make it easier for pro-globalization types to scapegoat, point the finger and to just plain old ignore the rantings of their rivals.

[Loonman]

6. "potential sympathisers to keep well away from the protests"

Yeah, I guess you're right. I've thought about going to those type of protests, but there were always too many rock throwers around.

[Brian Sweat]

13. It says, 'we're too immature to protest peacefully"

[Frederic Bastiat]

21. Here's a thought

It says "we don't like you" to the corporations.

DON'T BUY THEIR PRODUCTS, ORGANIZE BOYCOTTS.

[GeronimoSkull]

36. What corporations are you boycotting?

And why?

[RandomKoolzip]

2. Globalization protests which end in violence are

not as common as those which end peacefully. Usually the people breaking stuff are not the organizers; this Toronto protest seems different. All protestors shouldn't come under the same criticisms for the actions of few.

Also, you'll usually find that the REAL disruptors at any march are the cops, acting like gung-ho pigs.

[ShimokitaJer]

9. Hate to contradict you, but...

we WILL be judged by the actions of the few unless we take an active role in condemning them. Passing the buck onto the cops, whether true or not, will be viewed as tacit approval of the protestors' actions.

Yes, most demonstrations end peacefully, but WE have to be the ones who are the loudest in condemning those that don't. Otherwise, we only create straw men for the opposition to tear down.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

3. they are called "agent provacateurs"

They are hired goons who dress up and do vandalism, to get some good footage for tv news. People say it's the corporations and government who pays them, but I have a feeling the networks do it, since that's what they want to see and play on tv.

And by the way, smashing a window is vandalism, it is NOT violence. A window is an inanimate object, not a living being.

[Frederic Bastiat]

8. Wow that's a great weight of me mind

They are hired goons who dress up and do vandalism

Did you read the article? The part where one of the organizers went on record to condone the violence?

And by the way, smashing a window is vandalism, it is NOT violence. A window is an inanimate object, not a living being.

Please...

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=vandalism

van·dal·ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (vndl-zm)
n.

Willful or malicious destruction of public or private property

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

12. surely you see the difference between smashing a window

and beating a protestor? I hope so. In any case, even if some wayward protestor smashed the window of a Gap, let's put it in perspective. The Gap is collaborating with the communist Chinese regime to run sweatshops, with the constant threat of violence against the workers.

Given the reality on the ground, is smashing the window of a Gap the big crime here? I don't think so.

[Brian Sweat]

15. Beating a protestor is wrong

So is destroying private property.

One does not justify the other.

Maybe the vandals are hired goons, but if the organiser agree with their actions, it doesn't matter.

[TLM]

54. And here's my gripe with this stupid crap...

Busting the GAP or burger king window does NOTHING to hurt the corporation.

At best you've inconvenienced the franchise owner for a day or two to get their insurance to pay to fix the damage. You've only hurt a local business that hires local people, because their name is owned by a corporation that does things you dislike.


So not only does it make the whole anti-globalization movement look violent, but it makes them look stupid too.

[ShimokitaJer]

22. Excusing the behavior is counterprductive

Yes, it should be a crime to use sweatshop labor in third world countries to produce your products. It should also be a crime to throw a trash can through a store window. If you think the only way you can change the first is to tolerate the second, then you are promoting change through revolution (Boston Tea Party, anyone) rather than change within the system.

We can NEVER effect change within the system if we are viewed as tolerant of crimes committed by those who hold the same views we do.

Think of what your post says to the average reader: "I believe it is valid to protest with violence as long as you're protesting an unjust system -- and by the way, be sure to check my signature to see what politicians I support, because you want to be sure you know who to blame."

[EAMcClure]

48. Black ops

Okay, let's do a run down of what happens at a globalisation protest which goes violent.

The protest begins peacefully, but there are agitators who push. Their faces are obscured, be it by bandannas or gas masks. They dress in distinctive clothing, usually marked by soviet symbology. The press calls them anarchists, but how can you peg the folks when they have no spokespeople?

It is these same masked individuals who repeatedly undermine a protest, provoke the authorities, and invigorate a mob mentality. There are always arrests, but what happens to those arrested?

What HAPPENS to those arrested? What happens to the vandals, especially those masked bandits who initiated the violence? Are they identified, questioned, put on trial? How old are they? Do the companies targeted by the vandals press charges?

Think before you condemn. If these were really anarchist vandals, they would be arrested, shamed, convicted, and made spectacular. These mysterious bandits undermine the legitimate protest against an appalling policy.

Just like the union strikes and busting in the early 20th century, these are black operatives. They give a legitimate movement a bad name, and escape unpunished and unidentified.

Eric

[DeathvadeR]

5. Its what has to be resorted to.

It's a last ditch effort to express views that other wise would go unnoticed. You think that a few people with signs is going to make news? Come-on now.... we need an action sequence somewhere in there to get some eyeballs looking at the screen. Basically thats it in a nut shell, o and the fact that other democratic means never seem to work.

[Frederic Bastiat]

11. Oh really?

Basically thats it in a nut shell, o and the fact that other democratic means never seem to work.

Have you read about Ghandi and Martin Luther King?

:eyes:

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

16. Have you heard about the Boston Tea Party?

You would consider that violence, right?

[Frederic Bastiat]

24. Umm you can't use that

We were a colony back then, when going against your colonial masters all bets are off!


edit: title

[blindpig]

29. are not our nation states, indeed our planet being colonized

by these imperial/feudal corporations? Corporations were considered a dubious by many when legalized for good reason; they consentrate power while diffusing responsibility.

[Frederic Bastiat]

32. How so?

Thanks to search engines and easy access to information I can make informed choices on the corporations which I choose to patronize with my business. There are obvious limitations to this method as these corporations are consolidating more and more but it beats breaking windows in the name of Chinese serfs.

[Emperor_Norton_II]

35. Ah, no; "colonizing" means something else.

Anyway, you can make that case, if you want. And that gives you a casus belli fo reform by revolution.

But.

If you decide to go down that road, there's no going back. Even if Bush and all his cronies are thrown out of office and into jail, even if the Secret Masters of the Universe become a bit more cuddly, you cannot come back and say "well, that's done then, sorry for the fuss."

Revolution is an all-or-nothing gamble. Screw it up and you're dead. Backtrack and you're dead. Compromise and... well, you get the idea. So if you think you've got the courage of your convictions to revolt, then go ahead and start breaking things. Just remember that everything has consequences, and don't come wailing when the opposition escalates.

Yrs in full disclosure,

[Brian Sweat]

17. Yeah, without the action sequence

no one will look and say, "what a bunch of idiots."

[NashVegas]

7. And I Don't Get Major Market Newspaper Journalists

Who write long articles about protests, and devote 4 out of 77 lines to present why those people are protesting.

[ShaneGR]

10. Yeah, the vandalism kills the whole idea

It's unfortunate that a few can ruin the idea of many.

[Melinda]

14. And who here had heard of the WTO protests prior....

to the radicalization some of them have adapted, ipso Seattle?

How many years did Greenpeace try and protect the oceans before they began boarding ships?

And how long before new radicals (anarchists) take to our streets against Bush?

[Brian Sweat]

51. I know of a lot of people who are now aware of the WTO protest

and they all think the protestors are idiots.

[LoneStarLiberal]

18. Like the anti-war/ANSER protests...

...there has always been a militant fringe in the anti-globalization protests that are more interested in destroying things than protesting globalization policy.

They are as bad as the worst globalizing fiends because they are what people who have not made up their minds about the importance of globalization to them will remember long after the regular protests are over...and not in any constructive way.

[flamingyouth]

19. My little anti-globalization story

Once I bought a Dole can of peaches.

When I got them back to my office, I noticed that they said, "Product of Greece" and "Packed in Thailand."

Okay, maybe I'm an idiot, but :wtf: does that mean?! Were the peaches grown in Greece, then flown to Thailand (thanks, Cheap Labor Conservatives!) so that they can be canned and then sold to us? I was really disturbed by the whole affair. Years later, I still have the can - it's eerie to look at. No one has been able to really successfully argue this with me.

[HFishbine]

20. It's counterproductive

The methods of Martin Luther King, Jr. and Mahatm Ghandi are effective and should be employed.

I marched in several ant-war marches because I was pretty sure they would be peaceful. They were and they were as effective as they could ever be without vandalism (probably even more so).

There are people who have reputations for civility in their communitites, who recognize that the cars, shops, and homes are owned and operated by their neighbors, and who will march for a cause if it is done in a manner that respects the property and safety of our neighbors. Make it a hooliganfest, and you'll lose support.

[T_i_B]

25. I went on the anti-war marches too!

I went on 6 to be precise! (4 in London, 1 in Sheffield & 1 in Colchester)

All were policed really, REALLY well in my opinion, the 15 february march in London had virtually no arrests despite a turnout of about 2 million! The fact that the protests were peaceful was a big, big factor in us being able to mobilize such huge numbers of people. I had a great time doing it, although I hope that our governments don't f**k up in future on a scale where I feel the need to pick up a banner and get on the march.

However, there is the matter of sit-down protests. I can remember walking out of Hyde park on the Febuary 15 march and walking stright into the middle of a sit-down protest outside the US embassy with lots of people barking "call yourself a real protestor?" at everyone not sitting down. Hardly the way to encourage more participants if you ask me.

The march I went on in Colchester finished with a sit-down protest. The police saw this coming from a mile off and before the protest leafletted the protestors telling them that if they crossed a certain line outside the army barracks & sat down they would be arrested. Needless to say about 30 people did just that and got arrested like they knew they would. The police in fairness were not violent at all and were very freindly I found.

I didn't indulge in the sit-down protest but I did make a little speech calling for regime change in Britain. Next time I get on the mic at a rally remind me to bring a script!

[lcordero]

23. People like Stefan Christoff are hired hands used in order to turn

public opinion against anti-globalists. This is an example of destroying a movement from within.

[Frederic Bastiat]

26. How do you know this?

[Emperor_Norton_II]

28. 'e just does.

Don't question the theory of the All-Powerful Bad Guys, or else you might turn out to be a paid agent, too. :eyes:

Yrs in mutual paranoia,

[Frederic Bastiat]

30. LOL sometimes....

A spade is just a spade.

[Brian Sweat]

52. Unless it's a cigar.

[buddhamama]

27. we must be careful

on a rush to judgement.

remember the anti-globalization protests in Italy(?)

[BushNixon04]

31. corporations commit terrible violence every day

And yet the focus chosen by the media and by the posters here are on a few kids who smash the windows of a few stores that sell products that either destroy the environment, are made by terribly exploited workers (many children), and are generally hell-bent on taking over the entire frickin' planet.

Way to keep your eye on the prize. Really.

[Frederic Bastiat]

33. What prize? GAP chinos?

Way to keep your eye on the prize. Really.

And what prize did the smashing windows brigade have their eyes on?

GAP's fall collection?

:eyes:

[BushNixon04]

37. again,

the "prize" consists of the end of corporate tyranny over our nation and planet. Yes, the kids involved in this might have been a little overzealous, but I refuse to condemn their actions, especially when compared to the criminal actions of the corporations they are fighting against, which in many cases include many truly heinous acts including murder.

Is smashing a company's window an overreaction to the raping of the land and the murder of rights workers? Not in my book.

So you roll your eyes all you like and keep complaining about the poor, poor Gap store windows.

[ShimokitaJer]

34. You don't move your agenda forward by condoning violence

Yes, the media focused on the actions of a few kids who smash things and the media will continue to focus on the actions of those same few kids. That's what the media does.

The only question is whether our agenda will be hurt by this focus. It WILL if we are seen to be condoning their actions and offering apologies for the violent protestors because they were acting against a greater evil. If we want to be in a position to be taken seriously, we have to promote peaceful demonstrations and condemn those who commit violence for that same cause.

[BushNixon04]

39. property damage

is NOT violence. You want to talk violence, ask the indigenous peoples around the world about the violence of the oil companies who either hire private militias or use State-controlled military units to rape and kill populations who oppose their drilling rights. You want to talk about violence ask the ghost of Ken Saro-Wiwa (if you don't know who he was you should) and the Ogoni people.

[el_gato]

40. fuck the media

it doesn't matter what you do if you are
against the corporate agenda the media will
be against you.

Whining about what others think is a recipe for failure.

Oh, and I won't cry any tears for shitbag corporations
who suffer some well deserved property damage.
:nopity:

[Emperor_Norton_II]

42. Cheery.

Just remember, when the shit hits the fan and the great War Against the Corporate Oppressors begins in earnest, this is what you wanted. So don't be whining about it, 'kay?

Yrs in revolution,

[el_gato]

44. so you want to keep corporations at the top?

Your position makes no sense to me.

[Emperor_Norton_II]

45. Not particularly

But my position is easily summed up by the eminent philosopher, Super Chicken:

"You knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Fred."

To wit, if you want to go play Smash the State, don't get all shocked or hurt when the state smashes back. That's what you wanted, after all; a stand-up fight instead of this Mickey Mouse "compromise" bullshit, right?

Call it a word of warning from a tired old Emperor who's seen revolutions come and go.

Yrs on the Wheel of History,

[el_gato]

46. whatever

Kiss the whip if you want.

[Emperor_Norton_II]

47. Ah yes, the cry of the ardent romantic revolutionary

"Kiss the whip." How quaint.

I wonder what your reaction will be when the serious people come out to play with you and your merry band...

Yrs in merriment,

[BushNixon04]

49. that is an accurate critique

I can't really condemn these kids for smashing a few windows, but you have a very good point -- the means for spectacular violence belongs ONLY to the multinationals, not to the protestors....so TACTICALLY it may not be the best move.

[Emperor_Norton_II]

55. Tactics

Spectacular violence can be perpetrated by revolutionaries and they can get away with it. But without the will to back it up all spectacular violence does is place would-be revolutionaries right in the crosshairs while accomplishing fuck all. Like, say, smashing up a Starbucks for the sole purpose of gaining street cred.

So unless the protestors are willing to take things to the next level, smashing windows and making a mess is really kind of stupid.

Yrs in the Revolution,

[el_gato]

57. so you don't take this seriously?

Your condescending attitude speaks volumes.


Seattle put the whole neo-liberal globalization project on the table.
Meanwhile, you sit around and whine about a few broken windows owned
by multinationals.

I guess it's okay for Coke to gun down union workers in Columbia but when an opponent of globalized fascism breaks a window it's a terrible assault on personal property.

I'm just not gonna get worked up over some smashed property when
the very same economic forces grind-up and spit out everything that
makes this planet livable.

[Name removed]

60. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JJ]

38. The term "Agent Provocateur" comes to mind

Wouldn't surprise me a bit to learn that the thugs are plants to make the movement look bad and seem ridiulous.

[Emperor_Norton_II]

41. Because, as we all know, all TRUE members of the movement are angels.

Yep yep...

Yrs in globalism,

[FlashHarry]

56. You don't know that.

This whole 'the cops are in on it!' thing sounds a bit fishy.

[EAMcClure]

59. It sounds fishy, but think...

Think about what happens to those arrested. Nothing. Those responsible for vandalising or committing violence in those protests disappear after they are arrested. Why?

When the story stops, the truth begins.

Eric

[el_gato]

43. stop destroying the planet, pretty please sir

reformist crybabies never change anything

[Dookus]

50. yeah,

that Gandhi.... what a crybaby.

[el_gato]

58. you are not ghandi

and my criticisms here are not "anti-ghandi"

non-violence is not equal to reformists

can you say red herring?

[Brian Sweat]

53. Yep, your going wonders.