Time to pack the cop repellant!

[KrazyHorse]

Eth, you haven't answered my concern. Why is it that IBM should be able to tell teh Canadian government which way we should be running our country, just because we aren't as "business-friendly" as Dip****, South America is?

And I love the way it's "them" borrowing too much money when in a lot of cases it's actually their undemocratic corrupt political asswads. The rule should be as follows: lend money to a dictator at your own peril.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Frogger
Eth, you haven't answered my concern. Why is it that IBM should be able to tell teh Canadian government which way we should be running our country, just because we aren't as "business-friendly" as Dip****, South America is?

IBM has arguably been more successful in financing than Canada.

[Sikander]

I agree with Asher that these protests hurt more than they help. Whenever I see the sorts of people who do "guerilla theatre" in order to "educate" people I know I want nothing to do with their cause. They tend to be anti-intellectuals who think they are changing the world with their propodanda when in truth the world goes on around them while the propoganda is changing them into even more obviously dysfunctional loons.

As for the globalization arguments that Frogger brings up, I first heard these arguments brought up by the right wing a long time ago, long before the lunatic fringe turned globalization into the latest reason to put on a costume and get arrested. I do agree that the sovereignty issues are not to be taken lightly.

As usual there is very little that Monkspider and I agree on. Of course anyone is going to have more than a few points of disagreement with a Communist anti-abortion Christian from Kansas with questionable taste in music.

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by Frogger
Eth, you haven't answered my concern. Why is it that IBM should be able to tell teh Canadian government which way we should be running our country, just because we aren't as "business-friendly" as Dip****, South America is?

Since when does IBMediocre tell the Canadian government what to do? Is it really that wimpy?

Now they do have the right not to do business there. Perhaps that is what you are thinking of. A threat not to do business in a country with money is largely a bluff.

And I love the way it's "them" borrowing too much money when in a lot of cases it's actually their undemocratic corrupt political asswads. The rule should be as follows: lend money to a dictator at your own peril.

The catch is that when that happens the lenders won't lend again. Why should they? Also the lenders do take it on the chin upon occasion. Its when the nation (yes the government) wants to borrow more the the IMF has power.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Asher
I know you'd like to think it accomplished something, but it probably set the movement back if anything.

Yeah, that's why the movement kept growing until 9/11.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ethelred
Its odd to me just how much of the anti-globalization propaganda comes from Americans.

That's because you really aren't paying attention. One of the main leaders of the anti-globalization movement (a misnomer, but it will do) is from India, living in India. The truth is, we aren't opposed to globalization, we are opposed to the lack of complete globalization. Why should human rights, civil rights, environmental rights, labor rights, only be allowed in the West? Why should we allow unelected bureaucracies to decide whether or not some country (including the US) should be forced to allow certain products inside their borders, if that country decides that it doesn't want products produced by slaves or which kill dolphins or pollute the environment. Why should the US Federal government be forced to pay some Candaian company almost three quarters of a billion dollars because California has decided that a certain gasoline additive is a carcinogen?

We in the West aren't demanding to put our morals and ethics on other countries. We are supporting the demands of the people of the Third World, the labor unions, the environmentalists, the child laborers, the slaves, etc. The largest contingent of the "anti-globalization" movement lives in the Third World.

[DanS]

Boshko: Please be respectful of DC and its cops.

Snarling traffic and the like just doesn't make much sense to me. I think it's counter-productive to your cause.

But hey, I strongly disagree with your cause. So carry on!

[Timexwatch]

Boshko:

Going to be in Foggy Bottom this weekend?

Be careful. From everything I've received and read, it's not going to be a huge protest. The only thing that'll be a disruption are the idiots disrupting traffic.

I was down by the WB/IMF buildings on 18th and 19th yesterday and for some reason they didn't even have cyclone fence or protestors by mid-late afternoon, which was quite strange. Supposedly Friday is the blow-up day.

[monkspider]

Originally posted by Sikander
Of course anyone is going to have more than a few points of disagreement with a Communist anti-abortion Christian from Kansas with questionable taste in music.

I simply must add that to my sig Sik, I just can't resist it. Thanks for the memorable quote.

[Bosh]

Ah, so to answer your question then the protests didn't raise the profile much, as I have no idea what the hell you're talking about.

So you haven't heard of any of our protests besides Seattle? DC was definately on the biggest (if not the biggest) case of mass civil disobediance in years. And it did have an impact because the IMF was never really discussed at all before then...

all it does is tarnish the reputations of the people who support thoses causes

It does when the only example of mass civil-disobediance that silly canadians can remember is the only one where there any violence at all

People go to war because of differences. Globalizition decreases those differences. They won't go away completely, at least for a long time but I can't see what is supposed to be so awful about globalization.

Calling these protest anti-globalization is really distorting, since everyone at the protests except for a very small handful of fringe nuts is all for globalization, we just care a lot about how globalization takes place and on whose terms.

most people don't care about globalization. people care more about fighting terrorism/Saddam/whoever the hell it is we are fighting at the time.

Well we've got a "you know invading countries without a cassis belli isn't a terribly good idea" march on Sunday

Globalization is entirely voluntary.

Not when you're a newly democratic country that the IMF has by the balls because of the debt what was built up by an old dictator and whatnot.

Now the IMF is something else.

Exactly.

The rule should be as follows: lend money to a dictator at your own peril.

Definately! Instead we have the current rule of "pay for the debts that are now in the old dictator's swiss bank account or say good bye to whatever's left of your economy and while we're at it we'll take over countries economic policy and **** over your citizens to make sure the debt gets payed."

"guerilla theatre" in order to "educate" people

Street theatre is a silly thing, radical marching samba bands on the other hand....

is from India, living in India

Yeah the movement's huge in a lot of the third world, india especially they've had marches with hundreds and hundreds of thousands of people.

Snarling traffic and the like just doesn't make much sense to me.

99% of the traffic-snarling will be due to marches that have permitts. Pretty all the civil disobediance that is happening will be right around the IMF building and won't affect anyone not in the immediate vicinity.

Supposedly Friday is the blow-up day.

Nah. Friday should be fairly quiet, except for some relatively small-scale Black Bloc stuff. Saturday night should be when things happen if anything does (hope people on both sides of the barricades won't be too idiotic).

[Timexwatch]

Today's probably been a washout considering it's been drizzling all day. It's a riot watching all the hippies wander onto campus complete with their packs and pads and seeing them ***** when they can't get into any buildings on campus because of the lockdown

If any day is going to be a circus, I bet it'll be tomorrow as long as the rain holds off. I have meetings in the afternoon, but hopefully I can get over and take a few snapshots to post...

[Adam Smith]

One problem I have with the "all these debts were run up by dictators" argument is that many of these same countries are still run by the same dictators, or their relatives, or cronies, or former political opposition, who are often just as bad.


Boshko: If you and your friends start screwing around with the (environmentally friendly) subway tomorrow, I will be VERY unhappy.

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by Frogger
Because economic globalisation is happening, but political globalisation isn't. The result is that votes count less, dollars count more. **** deal.

Well this is the first logical explanation of the anti-globalization views I've heard.

And none of the demonstrations, filled with stupid people chanting slogans, and small groups of vandals wrecking the place, have done that so far.

So lefties - congratulations on wasting time, money and resources, on something which could have been replaced with a single post.

It's about signing agreements that limit a country's sovereignty.

Interesting.

Suddenly communists become interested in a country's sovereignty? The world criminal court, and the war crimes tribunal are all lefty projects and they limit sovereignty. Enviromental agreements, such as the Kyoto agreement also limits a country's sovereignty. The UN is the lefty's haven and it limits a country's sovereignty. The Geneva conventions too.

Universalism is one of the pillars of socialism, ain't it?

What's up with you all?

Yeah, that's why the movement kept growing until 9/11.

It kept growing because more and more people who want to do "something important for their generation" but don't know what - sought this as that special opportunity to be a lefty activist.

Oh, and don't forget those who were there just for the fun of trashing up a city and baiting the cops.




In any case - this confrontation adds NOTHING to your cause. I've learnt more about your cause from this thread, than from any of the riots or demonstrations.

And you know why?

Because when I meet a person that disrupts my daily life, disrupts traffic, trashes all over the place, and yells extremist commie slogans such as "The Dollar is your new God" and "USA is evil", the last thing I want to do - is listen to what that idiot has to say.

Instead, you should organize lectures, run ads, publish magazines.

But by targetting the extreme left wing crowd, using slogans such as "civil disobedience" and "down with capitalism" , you are only pushing thinking people away from your goal.


Or why not set up a government lobby that would push your terms onto globalization agreements?

May I remind you that people who are standing in the street, obstructing traffic, usually do ZERO to affect decision making.

[Bereta_Eder]

ah i love the fine smell of tear gas in the morning.

not actually since i dont go to rallies. (most of the time)

but i had the chance to see how it smelled, once. thank god a burning barel happened to be next to me and it absorded most of it.

you actually dont notice untill its too late. (eyes start dripping with tears)


i hid inside a lotto house and pretend i was feeling a form when the riot police runned passed by. worked too.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov

It's about signing agreements that limit a country's sovereignty.

Interesting.

Suddenly communists become interested in a country's sovereignty? The world criminal court, and the war crimes tribunal are all lefty projects and they limit sovereignty. Enviromental agreements, such as the Kyoto agreement also limits a country's sovereignty. The UN is the lefty's haven and it limits a country's sovereignty. The Geneva conventions too.

Universalism is one of the pillars of socialism, ain't it?

What's up with you all?

Duh? If we can't have universal socialism I'd rather be able to have socialism in one country than have universal rule of the transnats.

Sovereignty of a democratic country is the ability of a people to choose the type of society they want to live in by exercising their right to an equal say, no matter what their circumstances.

In other words, if we replaced individual nations with a bigger political union then fine...since there's still the principle that citizens' rights are looked after by the biggest bully on the block. When we let private corporations answerable only to their stockholders take over that biggest bully spot, we give up our right to have our welfare come first.

So unless economic agreements that let transnats **** with domestic politics are accompanied by political agreements that let individual national governments **** with transnats, screw 'em. In other words, I want my government to be able to take IBM to court because it moves jobs away because it pays workers in ****hole X less than it does here.