Daft Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 With everyone whining about how the Jade Goody coverage was driving them up the wall (I have certain people in mind), I though I would see if they were able to actually contribute something useful toward a slightly more important issue. You might have seen me, or not, start discussion that got ignored including things from how GlaxoSmithKline drastically reduced medicine for the world's poor and Questioning whether morality has any place in the virtual world, to crap like The Economic of Happiness which I'm glad to say almost managed to go onto a second page. Anyways... Reveal hidden contents On April 2nd, the G20 will meet at the Excel Centre in London. To graciously steal from the Guardian, What's going on and why does it matter? The aims of the meeting are hugely ambitious and, with the world in recession, the organisers have suggested that this event could make a significant contribution to global economic recovery. Who's coming? Leaders from 22 countries will be at the summit – not least Barack Obama, who is attending the summit as part of his first visit to Europe (and, apart from a brief visit to Canada, his first trip abroad) as US president. The rest of the Q&A is here, http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/mar/25/g20-q-a What's everyone's views on this? Personally I'm more interested by the protests that are going on. With the increased number in strikes over the past couple of years there is a growing unease among many sections of society. Are demonstrators being demonised? Quote The police have been talking up the dangers presented by the forthcoming G20 protests in London, creating fears of widespread disruption and violence caused by hordes of marauding anarchists hell-bent on destroying our society. City workers have been warned to dress down on Wednesday and Thursday, pregnant women told not to venture into the City, and some banks are even closing their doors for fears of staff and customers being targeted. Organisers of the protests stress that they are doing all they can to ensure any demonstrations will be peaceful, but are not being helped by the police's scare tactics. They say many ordinary people are legitimately angry with world leaders over the financial crisis, and should be entitled to express this anger. What do people think about the attack on Sir Frank Goodwin's house? Do you condone the actions of Bank Bosses Are Criminals? TLDR: Thoughts on the G20 London meeting and the protests. What's your view on capitalism in its current form?
Mundi Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 The fact is that there will be trouble there and the trouble will gather more coverage rather then the subject that is being protested. But on the subject of the G20, I dunno really I have not read much of what they do I have mostly read about them coming together to talk. But the fact that the financial leaders in the world are coming together makes the conspiracy nut inside me wake up :Þ
Goafer Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 Protests are the same as football matches. Only the ones that turn ugly make their way into the general news. That gives everyone the impression that all protests/football matches are carried out by mindless goons.
Shino Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 The problem with protesting is, the more you do it, the less credible it becomes. Every single one of this summits have protests, nobody cares any more, even if they're right.
Paj! Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 I sortof hope that the situation will get worse and worse, until the appearance of superheroes. Or vigilantes like V (for vendetta). They'd have to save the day. That would be cool.
Jimbob Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 Shino said: The problem with protesting is, the more you do it, the less credible it becomes. Every single one of this summits have protests, nobody cares any more, even if they're right. True, some protests are friendly which i like and some are violent which i don't like too much. But i guess the violent ones get noticed more, and probably don't actually result in anything positive being done to prevent more protests.
Dan_Dare Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 Paj Meen Ah said: I sortof hope that the situation will get worse and worse, until the appearance of superheroes. Or vigilantes like V (for vendetta). They'd have to save the day. That would be cool. Just don't forget what happened the last time super heroes and banks mixed
Chris the great Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 in my view the problem with protests isnt the protesters, its the chavs/thugs who join in just wanting things to kick off. look at photos of actual protests, you'll spot a few people in there who don't care about the cause, they just want to get into a fight with the police in relative annonymaty. as for people against capitalism, thats a bit of a sticky wicket to me. ok, capitalists have a disproportionate focus on money, and people are seen as assets, but we also have a pretty fine quality of life because of it. i think that capitalism itself is a good thing, the problem dosent lie in the system, it lies in the people behind it, the greed and corruption comes from people.
LazyBoy Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 I was planning to head down and join the anti-capitalism protests, but a couple of important meetings have been pushed back to the thursday meaning I won't be able to make it. Shame, this could be a big one, and I'd hate to miss what could become quite an important day. Anyone actually going?
rizz Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 Yes everyone. Let's protest peacefully. Let's stand here and shout outside the man's window. If he hasn't got the radio on, he might hear us! Maybe even listen to us! He'll probably turn his radio up after that but nevermind Or, they can smash stuff up and burn a few things, then everyone will take notice and realise how serious they are. I see this as bad times (duh). Like I hear politicians suggesting we are ready for a 'new world order', with a central world bank! Wft! Lets put one company in control of the worlds money. Yes. That will certainly be a good idea
Mundi Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 You can get very noisy without having to break and burn stuff. Case in point is the demonstration that was here (Iceland) a short time ago, loud as hell but they got the point trough.
Slaggis Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 (edited) rizz said: Yes everyone. Let's protest peacefully. Let's stand here and shout outside the man's window. If he hasn't got the radio on, he might hear us! Maybe even listen to us! He'll probably turn his radio up after that but nevermind Or, they can smash stuff up and burn a few things, then everyone will take notice and realise how serious they are. Tell me you're kidding. Actually tell me that's a massive joke, because otherwise you've made yourself sound utterly stupid. First thing that popped into my head, but did Martin Luther King have to resort to violence to get what he wanted? No, his words were so much more powerful than burning a few things, and causing pointless mayhem. If enough people were to go and march, it would be so much more effective than a few thousand people causing mayhem for the hell of it. Edited March 30, 2009 by Slaggis
Shino Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 rizz said: Yes everyone. Let's protest peacefully. Let's stand here and shout outside the man's window. If he hasn't got the radio on, he might hear us! Maybe even listen to us! He'll probably turn his radio up after that but nevermind Or, they can smash stuff up and burn a few things, then everyone will take notice and realise how serious they are. I see this as bad times (duh). Like I hear politicians suggesting we are ready for a 'new world order', with a central world bank! Wft! Lets put one company in control of the worlds money. Yes. That will certainly be a good idea Or be mistaken as some delinquent that can't reason and be put in jail. You need to put more in line to change something.
rizz Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 (edited) I don't think you can compare this to the black civil rights movements. It's completely different. - And you do realise there were riots after he was assassinated. If everyone had just gone 'oh no, hes dead, I am angry', would they have rushed for change? Edited March 30, 2009 by rizz
Slaggis Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 rizz said: I don't think you can compare this to the black civil rights movements. It's completely different. Bollocks, it's the same idea. Non-violent protest is by far the better option. Using violence, you'll only be considered a criminal, and not worthy of both being listened to, and of respect. There's so many other options to gain the attention to the cause you're fighting for, than burning down a few buildings. That's what I loathe about todays society, we seem to assume violence is the easiest way to get what we want.
Chris the great Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 rizz said: I don't think you can compare this to the black civil rights movements. It's completely different. it is, but then what will people think if you burn and smash stuff? they wont think your serous, they will think your a fucking moron whos just looking for a chance to act up. the situation may be different from the civil rights movemnt, but the idea of peacfull protest is still as valid today. by acting out in such a stupid way its just proving to the governemnt the people need stricter controles, and that a heavy handed police presence is the only way to deal with things.
Slaggis Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 (edited) rizz said: I don't think you can compare this to the black civil rights movements. It's completely different. - And you do realise there were riots after he was assassinated. If everyone had just gone 'oh no, hes dead, I am angry', would they have rushed for change? No shit. The riots after he was killed wasn't what directly brought about the change. His work before his death did that. You're telling me, that had he not died, then nothing would have changed? *sigh* Edited March 30, 2009 by Slaggis
rizz Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 Haggis said: Bollocks, that's not PC I think that's what you're most worried about :wink: Showing the people need stricter controls? How do people show the government and other powers that they need stricter controls? By going up to them and telling them, and hoping they'll give themselves a slap on the wrist? Of course i'm not saying that. Things would have changed over time as general attitudes change. I mean apparently it's cool to be gay now, but it sure wasn't back in the 50's! What i'm saying, is his death, riots and all that, probably sped things up imo. But anyway. . .
Daft Posted March 30, 2009 Author Posted March 30, 2009 (edited) LazyBoy said: I was planning to head down and join the anti-capitalism protests, but a couple of important meetings have been pushed back to the thursday meaning I won't be able to make it. Shame, this could be a big one, and I'd hate to miss what could become quite an important day. Anyone actually going? That's lucky for you because the big marches are on the Wednesday. http://www.g-20meltdown.org/node/1 Quote The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse will lead themed processions starting at 11 a.m. from the following rail stations: Moorgate Red horse against War Liverpool St Green horse against Climate chaos London Bridge Silver horse against Financial crimes Cannon Street Black horse against land enclosures and borders in honour of the 360th full circle anniversary of the Diggers At 12 noon, April 1st, we're going to reclaim the City, thrusting into the very belly of the beast: the Bank of England. I'll hopefully be at London Bridge. rizz said: Yes everyone. Let's protest peacefully. Let's stand here and shout outside the man's window. If he hasn't got the radio on, he might hear us! Maybe even listen to us! He'll probably turn his radio up after that but nevermind Or, they can smash stuff up and burn a few things, then everyone will take notice and realise how serious they are. I actually agree. Although I'm not saying I condone or will take part in any of it. Not saying I won't though either. Edited March 30, 2009 by Daft
Slaggis Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 rizz said: I think that's what you're most worried about :wink: Showing the people need stricter controls? How do people show the government and other powers that they need stricter controls? By going up to them and telling them, and hoping they'll give themselves a slap on the wrist? Of course i'm not saying that. Things would have changed over time as general attitudes change. I mean apparently it's cool to be gay now, but it sure wasn't back in the 50's! What i'm saying, is his death, riots and all that, probably sped things up imo. But anyway. . . Don't tell me what I am and am not worried about, thanks. I'm saying, you seem to think that Violence will immediately get them to go "Right. Now that people have burned down a few buildings, they must be serious! Quick, we better solve this problem". It won't. *totally off subject* Cool to be gay? Tell that to the thousands of gay teenagers that get bullied in schools, for their orientation.
rizz Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 Yeah. On a serious note, I quite like the way it's been planned. Even if it doesn't really do anything in the end, it should at least look pretty cool if there are enough people and leave a striking image (to probably be ignored). Violence would actually ruin it. Though I still think if everyone turned into a Viking Berzerker the end results would be beter Haggis said: Don't tell me what I am and am not worried about, thanks. I'm saying, you seem to think that Violence will immediately get them to go "Right. Now that people have burned down a few buildings, they must be serious! Quick, we better solve this problem". It won't. *totally off subject* Cool to be gay? Tell that to the thousands of gay teenagers that get bullied in schools, for their orientation. INTERNET IS SERIOUS FUCKING BUSINESS Grab a beer and stop getting so worked up My point is, all the people you're gonna be protesting to are gonna be saying 'sticks and stones may brake my bones but words will never hurt me'. If we are dealing with criminals, how many serious criminals are stopped with words? You have to find them, drag them to the ground and cuff them! *totally off subject* The only gay's i've ever seen bullied are stupid kids who are suddenly all in your face about being gay because it's the latest trend. If you enjoy the man love, fine, if you have to constantly tell me about how it's your right to enjoy it, leave now.
Slaggis Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 rizz said: *totally off subject* The only gay's i've ever seen bullied are stupid kids who are suddenly all in your face about being gay because it's the latest trend. If you enjoy the man love, fine, if you have to constantly tell me about how it's your right to enjoy it, leave now. I'm not replying to the other bit, because I know we won't agree, but we've both basically said all we can, so I don't see the need. Totally off subject, again. Forgive me, Daft! :p On the gay thing...just because that's your personal experience, doesn't mean you can generalise it to the entire population. By the "in your face" thing I take it you mean utterly camp gay guys? Well, unless they're literally in your face going "I'M GAY I'M GAY I'M GAY", it's no reason to bully them. Plus, with the fact that suicide rates for gay teenagers are substantially higher than those of straight ones...it's obvious it's still not "cool to be gay".
rizz Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 Oh I agree that an unpeaceful protest isn't the answer here, but only because there aren't enough people with the balls to do a proper job :P If it has to be done 'properly', which of course it always does these days, then let's not try and fuck it up And the gay thing, as with many other things, I think the key to a positive move forwards is everyone minding their own business, and keeping their own business. I mean I don't want to say being in your face is a reason to bully anyone, but some of them need telling to shut up and get over it. Originally I was just using it as an example of how social attitudes have changed over time, wasn't looking for a whole other discussion lol :P
Daft Posted March 30, 2009 Author Posted March 30, 2009 (edited) Haggis said: I'm not replying to the other bit, because I know we won't agree, but we've both basically said all we can, so I don't see the need. Totally off subject, again. Forgive me, Daft! :p Off topic makes baby Jesus cry!! rizz said: Oh I agree that an unpeaceful protest isn't the answer here, but only because there aren't enough people with the balls to do a proper job :P If it has to be done 'properly', which of course it always does these days, then let's not try and fuck it up Yeah, it's pretty much all or nothing. We can always live in hope (which proves my point because that's passivity right there ). Edit: And anyone who says violent protest doesn't work you just have to look back to the Poll Tax Riot in 1990. That had a big effect. Edited March 30, 2009 by Daft
Fierce_LiNk Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 rizz said: Yes everyone. Let's protest peacefully. Let's stand here and shout outside the man's window. If he hasn't got the radio on, he might hear us! Maybe even listen to us! He'll probably turn his radio up after that but nevermind Or, they can smash stuff up and burn a few things, then everyone will take notice and realise how serious they are. I have read through the replies and I may have missed it, but I have to ask you: How do you feel about suicide bombers? Is it right to kill yourself, so that people pay attention to your cause? Is it right to break things so others will listen? Is there even a right or wrong? Hmm, it's difficult subject matter. The protests have become bigger than the actual meeting itself. To me, it sounds out the message that there is little to no confidence in leadership.
Recommended Posts