pk-ripper – Member
and hopefully they will if justified.
I’m interested how you’ve extrapolated my statement above to a blanket statement of what constitutes a protestor and how I’m so against them. Personally I don’t advocate civil disobedience any more than I advocate the police using heavy handed tactics, oh, and look, that’s why I stated the phrase above, which includes the words “if justified”.
My mind is perfectly open to the politics of a global economy, funnily enough, that’s because that’s part of what my work involves. And whilst I agree with sentiment that things could perhaps have been done better by any number of people, that number of people is counted in the tens of millions so specific protest is naive at best and missing the overall picture of how everything in a global economy is interconnected.
For example:
– Do you blame the investors in the tiger economies for not having sufficient faith in their own economies and instead investing in the US?
– Do you blame the any number of people globally for working hard and wanting a return on investment on their savings to allow them to grow so the time they’ve worked can provide for them when they need it?
– On the basis of that, do you blame the banks for seeking to provide that return, and perhaps somewhat ironically, investing in the tiger economies as they show consistent growth year on year?
The three statements above present an incredibly simplified picture of just a few specific circumstances that have led to the current position.
What my mind isn’t open to is those that are calling for the heads of bankers, those intent on criminal acts against specific people, intimidation of any kind on those that are seeking to carry out their normal work, and specific disruption. That impinges on everyones freedom. If those people who are protesting can specifically disassociate themselves in entirety from any interactions with banks, corporations, or in fact money, then I would support them.
I still don’t want a drink with you. ad infinitum.