it seems that the person who died at the G20 protests in London yesterday may not have been part of the rally after all and indeed may have just been trying to get out of the area and home from work.
...how sad is that? a victim of fear expressed as anger?
Individuals who were not involved, are now involved, there is no escaping it. The issue is too important, people concerned are not going to let it be brushed away by media propaganda or those regurgitating government hype. The fear of "what is to come" via deceitful activities perpetrated by corporations and governments is too much to bear and traditionally there has been only one way seen out of this type of human dilemma, revolution. Protest like this represents exactly that, mini revolutions and while unfortunate, are the only way we've learnt to do it. Ultimately though change must come from within, there is no escaping this fact.
...again people have let fear control their actions rather than love.
There are many ways to make others take notice of an action without resorting to violence against people. One is property damage, another vigilance. What if protesters had taken one one of the bank buildings in a destructive rampage instead of attempting to confront authority directly. What if violence against police (who are doing as instructed) was directed instead at inanimate objects of those responsible, i.e banks?
...think it would have made just as much noise? without the stigma of human casualty and violence associated with it?
The international press went loopy at the property destruction. Like dogs to water in a desert...they lapped it up. Check out these images. Specifically ones involving smashing the building window. How many cameras are poised to take a shot? Insane? Ridiculous? It's so bizarre that it almost looks set up, like they were told in advance to get there, as if they actually asked for something else to be thrown through. Can you imagine them sprinting to get that shot, to be there? Can you imagine one of them yelling "throw something else, we'll make you famous" ???? (subject for another post) Ohhhh yeah!!!
...stunning photographs, but what else do they say?
Do images like these speak of the power credited to property damage in making headlines? Does it present a future direction for ineffectual peaceful protests that get taken over by violent outsiders with ulterior motives?
There is all manner of information online related to freedom, protesting and activism. One such individual worth mentioning is John Zerzan, controversial philosopher whose call for property damage has inspired many to take to the streets. ”That is not violence. Sitting there doing dope and watching MTV . Then you go and get a job. Just schlep along. To me that is violence,” says Zerzan.
...some clarification: Peaceful protesting is not wrong, it just doesn't work any more and here's why; peaceful protest won't be effectual until those attending realise their obligation to keep these events "peaceful"
and it is their duty, no one else's; not the police, not the government, not the guy next door. It's the responsibility of everyone attending who feels strongly about "peaceful protesting" and the issues at hand to ensure it remains peaceful and effective; here's the bit they just don't seem to get.
...if "that" means becoming violent to keep it peaceful, THEN IT HAS TO BE DONE! A decision has to be made, is it important or not?
Using violence to ensure peace internally? It's the same thing tribal groups all over the world do to ensure honesty. i.e. Koorie example, Australia: spear in the leg of someone who steals from the tribe (doesn't have to be this harsh of course). Simply holding down offenders until police get there would suffice. It's so simple and humanly possible, something we are all programmed to do but not aware we can. All that need happen is for people to unite, before the protest action with defined knowledge of this required support. This in and of itself would deter anyone intent on misdirecting perception of the actual cause.
...35,000 people or more turning against them at the first sign of an outbreak of violence? Noooo, that wouldn't work...would it? ...should peaceful actions utilise directed violence to ensure intent when necessary?
They have to, it's the only way they can work and while I am in general an advocate of peace and non-violence, something has to give. It simply doesn't work and hasn't ever since violence first crept in to discredit groups and the objectives of these protests. Real action is needed, not pseudo attempts which repeatedly do nothing but deter others from joining important, life changing causes. Is there a realisation yet, after all the examples we've had over the years, that attacking police or authority figures does nothing to further any issue supported in the eyes of the rest of the world and doesn't effect change? No one, nobody in the protest, in any protest; ever does anything to stop these conspirator worms from causing this type of violence and discrediting the cause. Everone laps it up like a movie, 'yeah violence against the system!!" and joins in (group think). If anything THIS should make people angry and want to be violent, to stop the meaning being hijacked by these imbecile antagonists.
...when will we wake up and change tactics?
...there ARE many more!
Personal feeling is that we know exactly what is required yet are confronted by the same concept. That "we" need to be vigilant in prevention of violence at peaceful protests, that it is "our" responsibility and that it might mean "we" have to risk personal safety (which we're doing anyway just being there in the current circumstances). Disseminating instruction such as directives for group behaviour in case of violence before hand can change things.
...so here's what I recommend
Next time a peaceful protest is organised, those responsible for conception should ensure that all attending know unequivocably, that violence of any kind will not be tolerated and will be stopped by force if necessary, through the intense power and intervention of the entire mass.
If issues like this are to mean anything at all , those involved need to be prepared to "kick the crap out of anyone" who tries to change the focus, not the police. The main reason nothing happens as a result of these types of mass protest is because of violence to persons associated with them and what that does to fence sitters and others who would normally be involved, which is the majority of the population.
...stop fighting each other through attacking authority and begin to see, there are so many other ways.
This is only a minor example of what could be done to facilitate more meaningful and peaceful protest given the current climate. Other, more fear2love style examples of protest such as 50,000 people chaining themselves to each other around the city, mass hunger strikes, uniting in consumer onslaughts of corporations responsible by boycotting products would be preferable...the list goes on, unite in creativity.
...what does it really come down to? the perception of sacrifice? how much is your remote control and tv worth to you? what will the future be like because of what you do now? what we do in the present forms the future! for all of us (subject for another post)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment