|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
 Posted - 02/06/2002 : 18:07:12 [Permalink]
|
I don't seem to speak clearly enough for you to understand, so I am asking you to operate under the same conditions that you ask me to operate under using your own words. Alas, for some reason you don't even understand your own words.
You are the one living in false dichotomy land. I said nothing about "always" in any case. I am telling you what has happened in recent WTO protests both in the U.S. and other places. If you don't think that what I am telling you is true, then I cannot help you. Make all the lists that you want. You certainly old enough to understand the term "police riot."
quote:
Originality will get you nowhere.
"Not one human life should be expended in this reckless violence called a war against terrorism." - Howard Zinn |
 |
|
|
PhDreamer
SFN Regular
USA
925 Posts |
Posted - 02/06/2002 : 18:15:33 [Permalink]
|
Gorgo, you said:
quote:
When you hear about protesters "clashing" with police, for the most part they are non-violent protesters being beaten by police.
You did not qualify this as only WTO protests. If you wish to do so now, that's fine but your statement as it was is all-inclusive. That's what I was taking issue with. The WTO violence may very well be the sole responsibility of the police. That does not justify your indictment of the entire history of police action at protests.
Adventure? Excitement? A Jedi craves not these things. - Silent Bob |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 02/06/2002 : 18:21:36 [Permalink]
|
I said "for the most part" first of all. We were talking about WTO/WEC protests, second of all. Third of all, police can no longer hide behind "not enough training" or "nerves frayed." Unless of course, all criminal behavior can be excused by those things.
quote:
Gorgo, you said:
quote:
When you hear about protesters "clashing" with police, for the most part they are non-violent protesters being beaten by police.
You did not qualify this as only WTO protests. If you wish to do so now, that's fine but your statement as it was is all-inclusive. That's what I was taking issue with. The WTO violence may very well be the sole responsibility of the police. That does not justify your indictment of the entire history of police action at protests.
"Not one human life should be expended in this reckless violence called a war against terrorism." - Howard Zinn |
|
|
|
Xev
Skeptic Friend
USA
329 Posts |
Posted - 02/06/2002 : 18:55:18 [Permalink]
|
quote:
If I accept these claims as valid, I am more likely to consider police action justified because I am more likely to think that the protesters are the general cause of the disturbance. Now, I admit that this does not consider the extent to which the severity of police action is justified once the skirmish is underway but I think that's a different issue. I welcome your criticism of my inductive process.
PHdreamer: Your logic is sound and convincing..BUT there seem to be instances of unjustified police action, such as the one @tomic described. So I am wondering, how broad is this generalization?
Xev -Ad astra!- Bellringer |
|
|
|
PhDreamer
SFN Regular
USA
925 Posts |
Posted - 02/06/2002 : 19:09:31 [Permalink]
|
quote:
quote:
If I accept these claims as valid, I am more likely to consider police action justified because I am more likely to think that the protesters are the general cause of the disturbance. Now, I admit that this does not consider the extent to which the severity of police action is justified once the skirmish is underway but I think that's a different issue. I welcome your criticism of my inductive process.
PHdreamer: Your logic is sound and convincing..BUT there seem to be instances of unjustified police action, such as the one @tomic described. So I am wondering, how broad is this generalization?
You're right and I should have noted that I was purposely discussing from a wholly interpersonal framework. @tomic is right on the mark; there are obviously many variables that would have significant effects in different situations that are difficult or impossible to predict. My focus was on the relatively predictable interpersonal and intergroup dynamics and it greatly affects the pure applicability of my logic.
Adventure? Excitement? A Jedi craves not these things. - Silent Bob |
|
|
|
Piltdown
Skeptic Friend
USA
312 Posts |
Posted - 02/06/2002 : 23:21:54 [Permalink]
|
EEK! This is what happens when I stay away for 3 days. Something about an earthquake.
In any case, Gorgo is having trouble understanding my point. I think that quote:
the anti-globalization movement is a fraud
qualifies as a fairly clear, albeit overgeneralized, summary. One may not agree, but it is a point nevertheless.
Going back a couple of years to Seattle, we have this very interesting article from The New Republic on the involvement of ultra-right wing billionaire Roger Milliken in the Seattle protests:
http://www.thenewrepublic.com/011000/lizza011000.html
along with a followup from several months later:
http://www.thenewrepublic.com/thetrail/cnote052200.html
This one claims that "globaloney" is dead, which I suspect is not the case, but it also names some vested interests whose "progressive" credentials might be in question to say the least, U.S Steel, for instance. http://www.techcentralstation.com/1051/techwrapper.jsp?PID=1051-250&CID=1051-020502C
I called this a "radical" perspective because I don't think this movement addresses the real issue of corporate rule, and the role of corporate interest in shaping culture. Very powerful segments of the corporate world get away scot-free under the anti-globalization paradigm. The movement's addiction to retro-60s style doesn't help much.
Sorry, Atomic, it just seems ludicrous for Bill Gates, whatever his good works, to be attacking global monopolies and the accumulation of wealth. He has probably penetrated more deeply into the fabric of global society than any other business leader in history. I can't even denounce him without using a couple of hundred bucks worth of his products.
I recommend Thomas M. Franks' landmark book The Conquest of Cool:Business Culture, Counterculture, and the Rise of Hip Consumerism
http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/259919.html quote:
"Why do this kind of advertising if not to incite people to riot?"—Nike copywriter, 1996
and from Frank himself:quote:
Regardless of the tastes of Republican leaders, rebel youth culture remains the cultural mode of the corporate moment.
There is also this unfavorable review, from Salon.com, entitled "Were the 60s a Fraud?"
http://www.salonmag.com/books/feature/1997/12/cov_22feature.html
This rather misses the point, since Frank does not claim that "the 60s were a fraud" but that the advertising industry hijacked a genuine counterculture, and turned its perceived mores, forms, and values into the basis for mass-market consumer culture. He further alleges that this trend has actually grown in the decades since and is now completely dominant in Western Culture. That so few current ads display counterculture influence, another criticism leveled at Frank by Salon, also misses the point. He is not talking about technique, but about the basic values of current popular culture and their roots in the advertising industry's power to shape attitudes to its own ends.
This is of interest to skeptics because it is the real origin of many of the most egregious trends we see today. The diminuation of logic is the most serious of these, along with the misperception of what is or is not an authority worth questioning. That is, the perceived but largely non-existent authority of science is rejected, and the very real but unnoticed authority of celebrities is accepted without question.
The Hollywood/Madison Avenue Cultural Axis is the greatest power in the world, and attacks on "corporatism" almost ignore it. Why is that?
Abducting UFOs and conspiring against conspiracy theorists since 1980. |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 02/07/2002 : 06:10:05 [Permalink]
|
I've only been able to read some of the first article before I went to work. Quite a bit of spin in the article from what I see right from the beginning. I'm assuming that the gist of the article is that the "ANTI-FREE TRADE" protestors are being funded by the anti-free trade corporate swine.
There are no anti-free trade protestors, save for the people that support NAFTA, the WTO and the IMF.
Those that are against the WTO, NAFTA and the IMF are not against globalization or free trade. They are against the globalization of poverty, and the anti-democratic and anti-environmental policies that these agreements and organizations produce.
But, I'll keep reading.
"Not one human life should be expended in this reckless violence called a war against terrorism." - Howard Zinn |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 02/07/2002 : 11:58:39 [Permalink]
|
The "anti-globalization movement" consists of about three people. That's why I'm confused about what you're talking about. You're not talking about the actual protestors, you're talking about the corporate media's creation - the "anti-free market, anti-globalization movement." It doesn't exist.
quote:
the anti-globalization movement is a fraud
"Not one human life should be expended in this reckless violence called a war against terrorism." - Howard Zinn
Edited for spelling
Edited by - gorgo on 02/07/2002 14:21:50 |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 02/07/2002 : 12:08:13 [Permalink]
|
Don't think I have this issue of Foreign Affairs, but here is somewhat of a rebuttal for those who care to check it out.
http://www.wpunj.edu/newpol/issue29/hawkin29.htm
"The most recent allegation of Milliken funding for Nader work on trade was Ryan Lizza, "Silent Partner," The New Republic, January 10, 2000). Wallich's denial is in "Lori's War," Foreign Affairs, Spring 2000. Chip Berlet, a researcher and writer on right-wing movements, who has been cited as a source for Milliken's funding of Nader projects, told Walter Contreras Sheasby that he has no evidence of any such funding. Sheasby, who has been investigating the attacks on Nader, says "In 1996 many rumors about Nader's funding were spread by Robert Bartley, the publisher of the Wall Street Journal, who has a visceral hatred of Nader and his progressive organizations." Sheasby, "Critical Support for Nader, Without Left Paranoia and Disinformation," April 28, 2000."
"Not one human life should be expended in this reckless violence called a war against terrorism." - Howard Zinn
Edited by - gorgo on 02/07/2002 12:08:47
Edited by - gorgo on 02/07/2002 12:21:53 |
|
|
|
Xev
Skeptic Friend
USA
329 Posts |
Posted - 02/07/2002 : 13:08:15 [Permalink]
|
quote:
The "anti-globilization movement" consists of about three people.
Then who were all those folks at the Seattle WTO? I thought they were protesting globalization?
Xev -Ad astra!- Bellringer |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 02/07/2002 : 14:22:58 [Permalink]
|
From the information I get, they're protesting the anti-democratic, pro-poverty, anti-environmental policies of the WTO/IMF, etc.
quote:
quote:
The "anti-globilization movement" consists of about three people.
Then who were all those folks at the Seattle WTO? I thought they were protesting globalization?
Xev -Ad astra!- Bellringer
"Not one human life should be expended in this reckless violence called a war against terrorism." - Howard Zinn |
|
|
|
Xev
Skeptic Friend
USA
329 Posts |
Posted - 02/07/2002 : 14:37:05 [Permalink]
|
Then why do they say they are 'anti-globalization' and not 'anti-WTO'?
Xev -Ad astra!- Bellringer |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 02/07/2002 : 14:47:09 [Permalink]
|
Who is they? The protesters do not call themselves anti-globalization as far as I know.
quote:
Then why do they say they are 'anti-globalization' and not 'anti-WTO'?
Xev -Ad astra!- Bellringer
"Not one human life should be expended in this reckless violence called a war against terrorism." - Howard Zinn
Edited by - gorgo on 02/07/2002 14:47:51 |
|
|
|
Xev
Skeptic Friend
USA
329 Posts |
Posted - 02/07/2002 : 18:13:26 [Permalink]
|
'They' are the anti-globalization people I have talked to. (Wow Xev, a grand total of 2!)
And, that is what they are called in the newspapers.
I have never heard any complaints about the label.
Xev -Ad astra!- Bellringer |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 02/07/2002 : 18:39:44 [Permalink]
|
Well, then I stand corrected. But I would ask why they call themselves "anti-globalization?" Do they call themselves "anti-free trade" as well? Why?
I have heard them use the term "anti-corporate globalization" to describe themselves. I just got an email when I read your message from http://www.fpif.org that talked about "antiglobalization's" future.
My feel of the situation is not that these people are against global trade, but that they are against the tactics used by these organizations. I think the terms "anti-free trade" is a complete misnomer, and if people are using "anti-globalization" to describe themselves, I think it may be because they've heard the term used by the corporate media.
There was last weekend a conference in Porto Alegre, Brazil called the WSF (World Social Forum). I haven't heard any details yet, the web site I posted gives some details. I'm sure there are and will continue to be articles at 50years.org, tradewatch.org, zmag.org, commondreams.org and alternet.org. There is a special report at democracynow.org as well. The original post in this thread made it sound like there were no protests in NY at the WEF, but of course there were many people protesting there as well as thousands in Brazil.
quote:
'They' are the anti-globalization people I have talked to. (Wow Xev, a grand total of 2!)
And, that is what they are called in the newspapers.
I have never heard any complaints about the label.
Xev -Ad astra!- Bellringer
"Not one human life should be expended in this reckless violence called a war against terrorism." - Howard Zinn |
|
|
 |
|
Topic Locked
