> Can you READ, for God's sake? I'm arguing AGAINST Snyder and Newman and in
> DEFENSE of direct action. Try not to look any more ridiculous than you have
> to.
Sorry, I was half awake when I wrote that!
Also being overly sensitive because some of my friends were involved in that action.
I can understand that Nathan is raising some nuanced questions about actions like this. I know that he isn't knee-jerking about this, like some activists tend to do. They view any protest that causes inconvenience for working people as something that automatically alienates them. There also is the context of the action, as Lou points out in regards to timing. I'd also point out the factor of audience. Civil disobedience at sporting events would be hugely unpopular among sports fans, but blocking traffic is seen as something that happens as being part of traffic.
Looking at pictures from today's protest, it looks to me like they took care to create their blockade at a point that prevented entry into the tunnel, but didn't trap people in the tunnel. If this is the case, they did the CD in such a way to give motorists the ption to turn away from the action and pursue other options.
Sorry about jumping over Lou. I'll admit to not reading his post.
I'll look for the dumbass in the nearest mirror.
Chuck0
------------------------------------------------------------ Personal homepage -> http://chuck.mahost.org/ Infoshop.org -> http://www.infoshop.org/ MutualAid.org -> http://www.mutualaid.org/ Alternative Press Review -> http://www.altpr.org/ Practical Anarchy Online -> http://www.practicalanarchy.org/ Anarchy: AJODA -> http://www.anarchymag.org/
"The state can't give you free speech, and the state can't take it away. You're born with it, like your eyes, like your ears. Freedom is something you assume, then you wait for someone to try to take it away. The degree to which you resist is the degree to which you are free..." ---Utah Phillips