Not everything in this world is ugly.
I'll be posting more about the madness once the need strikes. I'll just say this for now: everyone needs to keep a very close eye on people like John Minnis from Oregon, who is proposing legislation that would cause protesters to be treated as terrorists. I may not have a lot of faith in the executive or judicial branches of government these days, but I'm hoping that the legislators will have the sense to throw that out. Equating civil disobedience with senseless violence is extremely dangerous at best.
Mark - As a libertarian, you of all people should appreciate our first amendment liberty of free speech. Seems to me that what you say matters more than who agrees with you or who else happens to be standing around when you say it.
Parades, protests, etc. give the opportunity for all sorts of people to come out of the woodwork and speak their minds in a public place without necessarily professing allegiance to any group. The KKK has the right to demonstrate. People have the right to go to a KKK rally and protest the Klan. People have the right to go to the KKK rally and canvas for the HRC, sell Girl Scout cookies, protest war, support the war, or hold up signs of aborted fetuses, and it doesn't mean that they have any allegiance to the Klan, nor that they share beliefs with the Klan. Nor does it strip any individual of its first amendment rights.
Likewise with your so-called America-hating protests. A person can wish for peace without hating America. That doesn't change if they're standing next to an "America-hater" or even if an "America-hater" asked them to come to the demonstration.
As for civil disobedience, 25 years for blocking traffic seems extreme whether you are an "America-hater" or happen to be in the company of an "America-hater." And defining someone, whether or not they are an "America-hater," who blocks traffic as a terrorist is downright ludicrous. Not to mention that the threat of being named a terrorist is probably enough to keep a lot of people home from even authorized demonstrations.
We shouldn't have to fear imprisonment for expressing our opinions. That's one of the things we're supposedly "freeing" the Iraqi people from, right?
On the bright side, it looks like the bill has no chance in hell of getting passed in its present form.
Posted by Lisa at April 7, 2003 10:05 AMLisa, umm I don’t know you but have come to respect your opinions and perspectives through your writings on this web page. I’ve known Joseph for more than twenty years and have come to respect him for his opinions (and he, I believe, mine) even when our opinions are not evenly yoked. We raised kittens from the same litter years and years ago; we have common ground.
Most certainly I support anyone’s right to express an opinion in any manner they deem fit. However, I will not relinquish my right to disagree with that opinion even when defending the right to express it. Without getting into what might best be described as my bias toward some of the organisers, I admire the resolve of the peace activists but don’t necessarily agree with the message or the way that the message is delivered.
E.g., I compare the actions of the young (volunteering) men and women half a world away taking military action to a state sponsor of terrorism to the young men and women here at home staging vomit-ins and die-ins protesting that action. I just happen to believe that the vomiter-ins’ energy could be better placed rallying behind Amnesty International, donating blood or volunteering for the Peace Corps – some venue worthy of their zeal.
And yes, deep down in my heart I truly believe that we are “freeing” the innocent Iraqi people from tyranny, state sanctioned brutality and dictatorial rule. The present Iraqi regime stands for everything that we don’t stand for. I’m hopeful that we can agree on that. And on the fact that the “activist nee terrorist” bill likely will not pass in its present form.
C'est la vie à être parfaite. Alas, je ne suis pas.
I wish you the best.
Mark
Hi Joe.
As a Libertarian, I don’t disagree with your perception that our collective rights of privacy are being eroded bit by bit.
However, having read about the organizers of these larger “peace” demonstrations, it has become clear to me that these people/groups are not pro-peace but, rather, they are unabashed and unequivocal America-haters. I credit the demonstrators for their nobility however naive, but aren’t they (or shouldn’t they be) aware of the organizers’ ideological bent? If so, then I can no more absolve their involvement in a “peace” demonstration organized by these America-haters than I can absolve civil rights activists knowingly marching in a demonstration orchestrated by the KKK. Can you?
Hope all is well.
Mark
Posted by Mark at April 4, 2003 9:00 AM