Reply #131: I honestly believed

[Liberal Classic]

That they would have been taken as controversial, though I tried to avoid being inflammatory. It could be that people who oppose my position do not want to give it legitimacy by answering my post. Or it could be that are actually agreeable, or perhaps no one noticed. It's difficult to draw conclusions from a negative in any case. Also, I am working purely from anecdotal evidence. I have done no studies, take no polls of a representative sample of the left. The only certian thing is these observations are mine along, in rightness or wrongness.

Here is an anecdote. I'm a United Statesian as an aside, and my city has good-sized immigrant populations from both the near east and the far. The last large anti-war march that occured in my town I was able to attend, as it occured on a Saturday. There were attendees from several nearby universities, and a few folks from out of state. Over a thousand people were there I heard, and I saw a few of my co-workers there, and some of my friends. A good time for all.

I was not suprised to see people of Muslim faith represented there. I was somewhat suprised to see a large group of people wearing keffiyeh-like masks carrying Palestinian flags shouting "death to Israel." Again with the qualifications, they had every right to be there. I'm a strong supporter of free speech even speech I disagree with, especially speech I disagree with. I was under the impression that their presence would be controversial, but I was wrong. As it would happen, they set up a booth next to what I assume were the anarchists. They're the ones carrying black flags, wearing black masks, shouting "death to America." These two groups seemed to find common cause and got along famously.

It would be unfair for me to say that no one accosted them to ask them about their views or to challenge them. Many people did so, but when challenged these people retreated to namecalling and profanity. In the interest of decorum I won't repeat what they said here. While I do not believe organizers of the march countenanced their views in all particulars, the most articulate of this group was invited to the stage to speak. His speech was a much watered-down version of what he had been saying all afternoon. Clearly he was softening his message to be more readily palatable by the general audience. The general audience responded favorably, and why not? The fellow's speech was most reasonabe, unlike his private behavior earlier.

The relevant conundrum for me is who is using whom?