Nov. 18, 2011 at 5:53pm with 7 notes
Reblogged from salgentile

salgentile:

These obvious attempts to instigate clashes with the police will only discredit the movement, even though the vast majority of its supporters remain peaceful and non-violent. There were plenty of protesters at Union Square who spoke passionately and intelligently about important social and political issues, like student debt. Their voices may be drowned out by the people who throw things at police officers and scale barricades for … I don’t know what purpose.

Well, duh.

But what is the mechanism by which a few people will discredit the whole movement? In other words, how do we decide what events are an inevitable result of its existence, and what are just the actions of a few “bad apples”?

Only a few guards were responsible for mistreating prisoners in Abu Ghraib. Only a few individuals were responsible for flying planes into the World Trade Center. Of the thousands of people employed by the financial sector, there’s probably only a few hundred at most who were responsible for the most destructive parts of the housing crisis. Who’s responsible (organization or the individuals) is usually debated but the general consensus doesn’t always come down on the same side.

Governments constantly give terrorists veto power over negotiations, leaving it the responsibility of the weaker party to “get their people in-line”; these requirements are logistically impossible, and the stronger party knows it, because it prefers the status quo.

So, Sal, who decides whether Occupy Wall Street is discredited by the violence? In other words, who are the creditors?

  1. halphillips reblogged this from benzado and added:
    Preexisting prejudices about the relative credibility of a group. If Occupy Wall Street seems likely to be violent, a...
  2. benzado reblogged this from salgentile and added:
    Well, duh. But what is...mechanism by which a few people will discredit
  3. jonbershad reblogged this from salgentile and added:
    Fox News segment on all...protester “thugs” “terrorizing children” for work, it’s...
  4. salgentile posted this