Protest the forbes Global Ceo Conference (1 Viewer)

[walrusbear]

how can you oppose protesting against the very embodiment of the system which creates a world where the income of the richest 1% (50m people) is the same as the income of the poorest 60% (2.7bn people)

because they don't think outside their own comfort zone
protestors disrupt their easy view of things. they are also easy to demonise with ridiculous stereotypes.

where did you pull that stat from, btw?

 

[Not-That-Bright]

No walrusbear, those protesters were just clowns that were running around smiling and having a ball annoying everyday people today. They pushed down the fence for confrontation with the cops not because they care about the issue but because they are not rational.

spell check pulled that stat out of his arse.
I'm willing to bet spell check, just like all of us here, at the end of the day is living a life of luxury.

 

[spell check]

spell check pulled that stat out of his arse.

BBC news article

yeah i think one of the major problems with countries like australia is the viewpoint that security and welfare are to be seen in terms of nations rather than individuals

everything is "us" or "them" rather than just people

seriously, when you think about it, say one CEO earns 12 million dollars a year or something. it takes 16 500 people earning living on two dollars a day to make that much

why the fuck should this ceo earn as much as 16,500 others put together?

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Say you earn $200 a day... that means it takes 100 people living on two dollars a day to make as much as you.

why the fuck should you earn as much as 100 people all together?

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Yes, I saw images and video on channel 9/10/7/abc. Why must you believe that these protestors are pure?

 

[spell check]

Say you earn $200 a day... that means it takes 100 people living on two dollars a day to make as much as you.

why the fuck should you earn as much as 100 people all together?

even the liberal party accepts progressive income tax

 

[walrusbear]

No walrusbear, those protesters were just clowns that were running around smiling and having a ball annoying everyday people today. They pushed down the fence for confrontation with the cops not because they care about the issue but because they are not rational.

did channel 9 tell you this?

 

[walrusbear]

BBC news article

yeah i think one of the major problems with countries like australia is the viewpoint that security and welfare are to be seen in terms of nations rather than individuals

everything is "us" or "them" rather than just people

seriously, when you think about it, say one CEO earns 12 million dollars a year or something. it takes 16 500 people earning living on two dollars a day to make that much

why the fuck should this ceo earn as much as 16,500 others put together?

because capitalism is unquestionable, apparently

if you aren't making money and happy with late capitalism then it is your fault.
non-westerners don't really seem to be in the equation.
look no further than the start of this thread to see that

 

[Not-That-Bright]

... but they were being troublemakers, they were being annoying...
What kind of game are you playing here?

 

[walrusbear]

Yes, I saw images and video on channel 9/10/7/abc. Why must you believe that these protestors are pure?

hahaha who said anything about being pure?
they're bringing as much attention to their cause as possible.

i just have issues with your stereotyping them as irrational and 'not really concerned with the issue'. in fact it is you who is ignoring the issue by reducing their actions to 'annoying' - just as the media does - in attempt to sidestep what is actually happening. if you attack the people making a stand john q public will assume they are wrong. happens with VSU reportage too. it's almost standard now to reduce protestors to 'troublemakers'. clever media manipulation.
you can see its effects here

 

[spell check]

i loved the poll in the free MX newspaper that is of course owned by murdoch, same as the daily telegraph etc

not - do you think the forbes global ceo conference is something to be protested against?

rather they pose the vital question -
do you think the forbes protests are going to do anything?

good to see them posing the important questions to the free newspaper reading public. go team apathy

 

[spell check]

i'd be annoyed if a multinational oil company came into my village, sucked out as much oil as possible then left me and my family with a contaminated water supply for the next two decades which killed many of my loved ones because we had nothing else to drink and they thought the cost of cleaning up properly would outweigh a few dead people

 

[walrusbear]

... but they were being troublemakers, they were being annoying...
What kind of game are you playing here?

annoying to who?
and why?

this discussion is nonsense

maybe they find corporate exploitation annoying

 

[Not-That-Bright]

They're being annoying to the general community by going into banks and harassing people, holding up traffic and such...

I love the corporations, should I go march against some group of protestors and break down a fence between me and them to get into a confrontation because I believe my cause is more righteous?

 

[spell check]

i would defend your right to protest even if i disagreed with your cause

 

[Not-That-Bright]

So you would favour some sort of brutal structure where people fight and wage wars against each other to prove their points?

 

[walrusbear]

They're being annoying to the general community by going into banks and harassing people, holding up traffic and such...

I love the corporations, should I go march against some group of protestors and break down a fence between me and them to get into a confrontation because I believe my cause is more righteous?

i guess
do you believe enough in your cause to do it?

btw, how much of this is actually true?
how many people, and where, went into banks and 'harassed people'? what did 'harass people' mean anyway. punch them or talk to them or what?

 

[Not-That-Bright]

but that's what it seems to lead to.. when you allow both groups to express their views violently then you end up in a situation where there is war.

 

[walrusbear]

So you would favour some sort of brutal structure where people fight and wage wars against each other to prove their points?

a silly extension
are the activists fighting and waging wars?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200508/s1449600.htm

once again the actions of about 10 count for everyone

 

[walrusbear]

but that's what it seems to lead to.. when you allow both groups to express their views violently then you end up in a situation where there is war.

fact is the protestors, on the whole (and arguably not at all) aren't violent.
you and the media are just portraying them so