Questions were asked about what "going over the line" meant. Assclowns like Crimethinc are exactly what you'd want to point at and say "that's what I'm talking about." Disagreeing with the government (or even just Republicans) is one thing, but going around encouraging people to vandalize websites/etc is something else.
Jesus. No wonder he looked like he was expecting to be arrested.
by Anonymous Coward writes:
on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @01:37PM (#9869932)
Idiots like this may as well go on the Republican payroll. It's all fine to be a mindlessly enthusiastic twit, but when you have the skills and ability to do serious damage to things, you lose that option and have to THINK seriously about the consequences of your actions.
What did he think would be likely to happen in the wake of acts of political vandalism, such as he advocates? Reductions in police powers in the governtment? Reduced government action against hackers? A more permissive government attitude towards legitimate, nonviolent, nondestructive acts of protest?
In any area I can think of, the consequences of the sort of infantile tactics he advocates would be a setback, by DECADES, of any civil rights cause even remotely associated with computing and activism.
The thing that pisses me off the most about this is that the damn twit could have spent that session brainstorming with the crowd, coming up with forms of protest that both got a message out and were PERSUASIVE, while also respecting the times we live in. Any angry four year old can come up with something as inventive as breaking someone else's toys. Not to mention the fact that the authorities don't need another group of terrorists/large-scale vandals to track.
The problem, of course, is that running a session like that would require a display of a) respect b) creativity and c) intelligence, all of which this speaker seems to lack.
Protest is great, but counter-productive protest is just masturbation. And if you are reading this and getting angry at me, take a minute, step back, and think. I'm not saying not to protest, i'm saying "protest smart, not hard", if I can paraphrase the old "work smart, not hard" saying. If you are enthusiastic enough to protest, you deserve to have that protest make a real difference, a real change for the better.
Think of it as avoiding the Nader Error, which is going to great lengths to set your own cause back.
Are vandalism and terrorism now interchangeable terms?
This country's language has been co-opted by the hard right to such an extent that even progressives like you often have had your consciousness arrested.
Other than that, I am with you about the importance of sensible tactics.
No more than "murder" is interchangable with "terrorism".
Ultimately, murder, vandalism, and other assorted crimes are not necessarily terrorism. What makes an act "terrorism", is the reason behind the act. If I kill you for your watch, it's not not terrorism. If I kill you as a warning to others not to say what you're saying, or do what you are doing, it's terrorism.
Likewise, if I destroy your property, harrass you, and restrict your ability to freely move about, all in an effort to make you afraid to
Crimethinc (Score:5, Insightful)
Jesus. No wonder he looked like he was expecting to be arrested.
Re:Crimethinc (Score:1, Insightful)
Idiots like this may as well go on the Republican payroll. It's all fine to be a mindlessly enthusiastic twit, but when you have the skills and ability to do serious damage to things, you lose that option and have to THINK seriously about the consequences of your actions.
What did he think would be likely to happen in the wake of acts of political vandalism, such as he advocates? Reductions in police powers in the governtment? Reduced government action against hackers? A more permissive government attitude towards legitimate, nonviolent, nondestructive acts of protest?
In any area I can think of, the consequences of the sort of infantile tactics he advocates would be a setback, by DECADES, of any civil rights cause even remotely associated with computing and activism.
The thing that pisses me off the most about this is that the damn twit could have spent that session brainstorming with the crowd, coming up with forms of protest that both got a message out and were PERSUASIVE, while also respecting the times we live in. Any angry four year old can come up with something as inventive as breaking someone else's toys. Not to mention the fact that the authorities don't need another group of terrorists/large-scale vandals to track.
The problem, of course, is that running a session like that would require a display of a) respect b) creativity and c) intelligence, all of which this speaker seems to lack.
Protest is great, but counter-productive protest is just masturbation. And if you are reading this and getting angry at me, take a minute, step back, and think. I'm not saying not to protest, i'm saying "protest smart, not hard", if I can paraphrase the old "work smart, not hard" saying. If you are enthusiastic enough to protest, you deserve to have that protest make a real difference, a real change for the better.
Think of it as avoiding the Nader Error, which is going to great lengths to set your own cause back.
Re:Crimethinc (Score:1)
This country's language has been co-opted by the hard right to such an extent that even progressives like you often have had your consciousness arrested.
Other than that, I am with you about the importance of sensible tactics.
Re:Crimethinc (Score:1)
Depends on your point of view...or lately, your ethnic background.
Makes you think now, doesn't it?
Re:Crimethinc (Score:1)
Ultimately, murder, vandalism, and other assorted crimes are not necessarily terrorism. What makes an act "terrorism", is the reason behind the act. If I kill you for your watch, it's not not terrorism. If I kill you as a warning to others not to say what you're saying, or do what you are doing, it's terrorism.
Likewise, if I destroy your property, harrass you, and restrict your ability to freely move about, all in an effort to make you afraid to