Possible. I have lost track! But still:
> as if they aren't even more exploitative to their employees
> than your average chain store. What's striking in that video is the
> liberals are so ready to brawl with the anarchists to defend some Whole
> Foods. Where were these folks when low income neighborhoods were having
> their houses stormed by foreclosure agents? Oh, probably at Whole Foods
> buying some free range.
As someone who buys free range: Touche! :-) But, really, even if some tears were shed along the way, my impression was that most of those against the black bloc action either think it was tactically terrible or childish and dangerous.
It is not true that if one removes the black bloc, what remains are Whole Foods shopping liberals, don’t you think? What the OWS protestors were defending (if perhaps incorrectly) was not Whole Foods but the movement from tactical error/sabotage, I would say. I mean, they didn’t come out marching to defend Whole Foods - they were, “inter alia”, marching against foreclosure agents storming low income households.
> I just feel like this condemnation feeds into the media narrative that
> places extra emphasis on the actions of these few.
This I am afraid I find a stretch. The media loves this sort of thing!
So, when you write “I don’t see what happened in Oakland as a disaster”, do you mean:
- you disagree with the view (expressed by many here, such as Doug, SA, Max) that the vandalism was at the least a tactical error
- you think it’s impact or influence is or will be minimal
- something else?
Cheers,
—ravi