[lbo-talk] Anger at suicide of US internet activist

[andie_nachgeborenen]

Did I say that his act of what may have been civil disobedience was invalid? I said that his depression is the wrong focus. Don't say, poor guy, he was depressed, they should't have picked on him. Which is, incidentally, condescending. We should say, brave guy, tragic outcome, bad laws, let's change them.

Sent from my iPad

On Jan 15, 2013, at 6:48 AM, Wojtek S <wsoko52 at gmail.com> wrote:


> Andie: "I am stating to get angry at the misconceptions, distortions,
> and lionization of Swartz and his case.
> 
> [WS:] So just because he was a depresso, his act of civil disobedience
> is invalid?  He may not have been hounded, but the fact that he was
> prosecuted with charges that carry draconian penalties certainly
> contributed to his depression.  Give wide prosecutorial discretion in
> this country, the prosecutors could come up with lesser charges but
> they chose not to, either on direct orders from their corporate
> masters or perhaps to suck up to them.  How is it different from the
> practices of "people's courts" in nazi Germany?
> 
> -- 
> Wojtek
> 
> "An anarchist is a neoliberal without money."
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk