Forums | MacLife

That tactic isn't limited to any certain group of people.  Let's be realistic here.

Macul, If you mean that it's not limited to conservatives per se, then I agree.  But it is limited to a specific group of repetitive offenders.  One only needs to spend a few days here and it's a no-brainer.

But this thread is about NokX's arguement about affirmative action and anti-war hippies, so it's probably best if we don't get into another discussion about who's a jerk.

Aren't "hippies" like 50-60 year old grandparents now?

And  why are they not allowed to speak out against something they find to be a terrible threat to society and the world in general? Why are they supposed to shut up about it as the war-happy types pound the drums and invade other countries?

Where is it written that We The People are not allowed to disagree - and VOICE this disagreement - with the actions of the gobmint? Sounds more like a dictatorship than a democracy to me.

Maybe the outspoken anti-hippies will show up to answer these important, totally American questions.  Maybe.

I don't have a problem with real protestors voicing their opinions against the possible imending war.  Their message is important and should be heard. However, judging from my experiences, their message is often drowned out by the "tag along" protestors, the sort who are just looking to bash everything associated with the Bush administration (or whatever the present administration might be) and those who simply don't have any clue as to what is going on.   

There is such thing as protesting, and then there is such thing as just making an *ss out of yourself.  When the protests break down into violence, protestors shout down anyone trying to speak, smash windows, spit on soldiers, and use poor symbolism, then people are going to ignore them, and eventually begin to dismiss all protestors.

So, I don't think the protestors should shut-up, but I do think they need to do a better job of policing their own, making their message a bit clearer, and they really need to start offering viable solutions.

I am glad you are able to make the distinction between "real" activists, or protestors, and people who are simply looking to publicly make asses of themselves.  The thing is that the asses exist everywhere, not just at political protests: i.e. sporting events, political conventions,  night clubs, ski lodges, television talk shows... You name it an they are there.  So there are problems with the idea that progressive activists should be "policing their own."  However, we are.  You've probably noticed that such idiots have not shown up in any noticable numbers to protest the Bush admin's retardo war.  We're making progress.  There has also been plenty of coverage of well-articulated arguements against this war.

I agree that the anti-corporate globalization movement has more work to do in articulating their ideas.  This is partly due to how incredibly complex the issues are as well as that the attention-seeking anarchist opportunists tend to steal the show with their rock-throwing and, as you say, "poor symbolism."  But regardless I think the movement is right in its demands for international corporate accountability and the ending of government corruption by corporations (however idealistic that is).

ANyway, marching in political protest is a rich and vital tradition in this country whether bored football hoolians show up or not.

I suppose that's why people feel like they have to do damage in order to be heard.

Yeah.  Burning down buildings, smashing windows, and assaulting police is a great way to get your message across.   

So there are problems with the idea that progressive activists should be "policing their own."  However, we are.  You've probably noticed that such idiots have not shown up in any noticable numbers to protest the Bush admin's retardo war.  We're making progress.  There has also been plenty of coverage of well-articulated arguements against this war.

This claim I'm not so sure about. I think one sure way to see a news orgs bias is to watch how they cover a protest. Example: after the World Bank protests in NYC (last year?), ABC and CBS ran "balanced" stories ("there was a protest today, this is kinda sorta what the protestors wanted, and some people were arrested"), but then Fox went out of its way to show only negative things about the protest. So, Fox is on the right, and ABC and CBS, while left, are also part of the thing that's being protested against, so they don't dare give too much indepth coverage.

Now, however, more and more media orgs are coming out as against the impending war, so the protests get more positive coverage with more depth. Whether or not the outside world notices more or less violence at the protests has more to do with how the news decides to cover it, rather than whether or not those whackos show up.

Though I will agree that more protest organizers are trying harder and harder to stop violent groups from attending, I just don't know how successful they're ever likely to be.

...

You are confusing peace protesters with football fans you yo-yo.

heh.. dont you mean soccer fans....

In SF, the only violent people I saw were those that were for War. Which was 0.1% of 200,000.

were you looking at your hands the whole time?

I'm in the minority

We know that. You are of the few that are for War.

The few, the proud. You got it

also, i'm sick of all these anti-bush, anti-war people...  i mean i don't love war, but sometimes you have to do it.  then all these hippies saying "drop bush, not bombs", etc...  why don't we drop hippies in the bombs?  they wanna sit back and do nothing.  i want them on the front line when something does happen back to us because it'll be all their fault when it does happen.

I don't want to offend you, but I must say that this is a demonstration of profound ignorance.  You onyl need to watch TV at this point to know that it isn't hippies marching.  How have you managed to miss that?  I have been at every major anti-war demonstration on the east coast since Bush attempted to resume the war with Iraq.  I have joined a massive and growing movement comprised of people from every social, economic, racial, etc., class.  Yes, there were hippies in the crowd (and it was great to see them come alive again), but they were hard to find in the hundereds of thousands of others that are difficult to classify in the dismissive manner you have done here.  I marched and discussed a broad range of topics with just about anyone you can label.  Perhaps that's why you are disturbed enough to start a thread.  This is bigger than a handful of washed up leftist hippies.

You aren't even able to dismiss the massive crowds as leftists.  The front page of most news Websites depict the leaders of France and Germany united against this stupid initiative.  Are they hippies, too?  Perhaps you'll say who cares about those countries.  This past Saturday in D.C. I marched with many staunch conservatives (the very opposite of hippie), for instance, who have very different reasons for opposing such a war.  We found something in common, though:  We demand public discourse and democratic debate on this issue before any decision is made on our behalf.  But that's the point, isn't it?  This war isn't being conducted on our behalf.  The Bush administration has over-ridden anyone who has pushed for discussion of alternatives, deeming people traitors, terroists, un-Americans, etc.  Screw that.

the other companies (germany, france) don't have access to the intelligence that we and england share either.  they're out in the dark just like the general public is.  when our government releases the proof of iraq's crimes, you will see.

If you want an eye-opener, read the German and French online news for a few weeks (most have English versions).  It will be a disturbing lesson in how duped the American public has become.  People in other parts of the world have not been victims of the barrage of intimidation and bullsh** that we Americans have.  They look at this whole thing from the outside and have lot's of interesting viewpoints that never pass the editing desks here.  I believe it's a good regular practice.  When Bush says the Russians said so-and-so, go to the Russian papers and see what a lie it (usually) is.  Same with other countries.


This link is a good start to finding non-American news, including French and German (for laughs, everyone should visit the Iraqi national daily):

http://www.onlinenewspapers.com/

If you want an eye-opener, read the German and French online news for a few weeks (most have English versions).  It will be a disturbing lesson in how duped the American public has become.  People in other parts of the world have not been victims of the barrage of intimidation and bullsh** that we Americans have.  They look at this whole thing from the outside and have lot's of interesting viewpoints that never pass the editing desks here.  I believe it's a good regular practice.  When Bush says the Russians said so-and-so, go to the Russian papers and see what a lie it (usually) is.  Same with other countries.


This link is a good start to finding non-American news, including French and German (for laughs, everyone should visit the Iraqi national daily):

http://www.onlinenewspapers.com/

You're just BEGGING to be labeled a traitor, aren't you, huh? Foreign press indeed! Like THEY'D know anything! PFFFT!! They're FOREIGNERS, fer krissakes! Who cares what they think?!

Viva le France...  Oops.  Did I say that out loud?

Viva le France...  Oops.  Did I say that out loud?

That does it, pal!! I'm calling Homeland Security right now! What's yer home address, BTW?

Um, 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
        Washington, DC 20500