🚀 go-pugleaf

___________________________________________________________________________
BACK UNDER YOUR ROCK cur boy Mosley AND STAY THERE!    
___________________________________________________________________________

On Sat, 29 Jul 2000, Jacques Chester wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> MAD MAL <m.bradley@student.murdoch.edu.au> wrote in message
> news:Pine.GSO.3.96.1000728155151.22538H-100000@student.murdoch.edu.au.
> ..
> >
> > Interestingly this thread has been diverted to doom and gloom
> > predictiond based on our views of human nature and capacity for
> > violence...
> 
> I'm not so concerned about the individuals,
> Mal - I just happen to recognise that
> individuals in mobs tend to surrender their
> own individual rationality. It's probably
> a pack instinct inherited for times of
> extreme danger - everyone attacks at once,
> in a frenzy.

Point taken...
 
> It can be defeated, but it takes a good deal
> of work. One of the groups who have a
> good control of replacing the irrational
> mob with a obedient one is the military.
> The romans excelled in creating disciplined,
> well-ordered armies - and crushed the
> hitherto unstoppable hordes of various
> nations.

There will be some order to this "mob" and its leaders...

I like yourself hope that some good control is possible!
 
> > There are the formationation of a growning and diverse
> > anti-globalisation social movement based on real pain that real
> > people a feeling around the world because of globalisation...
> 
> I'm not going to disagree on that point.
> 
> [..]
> > > Will anyone be turning up in the
> > > Seattle Looter's look? Gasmask, hankerchief,
> > > baseball armour?
> >
> > At the right time many of these things might be useful...
> >
> > What is it, that boy scout motto, be prepared?
> 
> Be prepared to riot and loot?

Be prepared for self defence and protection, not to riot and loot...

> [..]
> > > If the crowd turns into a mob, the only real option
> > > left to the police is to deploy brute force
> > > to break it up before it worsens.
> >
> > There are thankfully other methods, from what I can gather
> > protesters will be in self sufficient tribes, some with leaders
> > others not, so the crowd can be controlled somewhat...
> 
> If it can be kept spread out and in a good
> mood, yes it can. 

That is the plan...

> If crowds jam up, the odds of violent outburst rises.

Yes, particularily in relation to crowd control...

> You must also consider the "thinning" effect.
> That is, when things turn violent, those
> people possessed of their senses and in a
> non-violent frame of mind tend to leg it.

Yes...

> Suddenly all that's left are the
> troublemakers, sans any moderating elements.

And it is feared by some, the school kiddies...
 
> > IT IS THE POLICE WHO HAVE TO RETAIN CONTROL OF THEMSELVES!!
> 
> This is *always* an issue. Police are just
> as vulnerable to the same kind of mindless
> action as anyone - but they furthermore
> have the weaponry to make their actions that
> much more brutal.

Yes
 
> > Police must accept their loss of control during the carnival and
> > hold the barracades, and no doubt there will be plain clothes( and
> > others) spotting peoples who are on the nastier side...
> 
> I'll be interested to see what the police plan is.

Yes
 
> > > There really is no other choice.
> >
> > OH, BUT THERE IS...
> 
> Such as?

Dont let it get to the riot stage...
 
> When a protest becomes a riot, negotiation
> and mild coercion cease to be options. A
> rioting mob has nobody who leads it that can
> be talked to or even intimidated. It only
> understands one language: force. As I've
> pointed before, this is true of any mob.
> 
> > > I don't believe that violent mob action is even
> > > remotely productive.
> >
> > Mob action yes, but the violence isnt necessarily from a protester
> > or order controller point of view...
> 
> I hope it doesn't happen, Mal. Prove me wrong.

Not up to me, I will be on the opther side of the country...

:(
 
> > > There is, of course, a cynical body of thought
> > > that suggests that the "organisers" know all
> > > this, and are seeking out confrontation for
> > > the attention it will bring to "the cause".
> >
> > The thing is that the various tribes work independantly, some may
> > not even like one another, but for the S11 day they are part of the
> > carnival, some tribe could be thugs but I know of none
> > personally...
> >
> > Confrontation is appart of the process and getting 'the' message
> > across...
> >
> > Some people will be more confrontational than others, even
> > violent...
> 
> Which is how Seattle devolved into a civil
> riot. Started off well, some people took
> the whole "fuck the system" thing to heart,
> and then wondered why the police beat them
> up and gassed them.

A minority, I hope Australians have nicer ways of expressing this...

Let see how they protest on July 30 in Philladelphia tonight, for there
will protests at the Republican Conference...

> To some people, this response is proof of
> their beliefs. Fair enough. But do they think
> that continuing to incite police violence
> is really going to improve the situation?

In the Seattle case some were just plain thugs, looking for a way to vent
thir spleens...

> Not really. If anything, they'll make it
> worse. First Law of Bad Management: If
> something isn't working, do more of it.

Yes
 
> [..]
> > But what of your view on globalisation?
> 
> I think that there are material gains from
> trade for all countries. I also think that
> there are very dangerous consequences in
> backing away from trade as fast as we have
> moved towards it.
> 
> However I do think we need to slow down the
> process of integration. As the saying goes,
> "Preach the need for change - but never
> change too much at a time". Globalisation at
> the moment is an overrevving beast that
> has been dangerously distorted by certain
> nations (in particular, the USA and China).
> I think we'd do well the take the foot off
> the accelerator some, and start considering
> certain critical structural issues. Such
> as: where will the demand of the next
> fifty years come from? Who will supply that
> demand? And will there be a mismatch? And
> what happens when too many people miss out?
> And how do you spread the benefits of
> growth across international borders?
> 
> It's the industrial revolution all over
> again, in many ways.

Yes there are some thorny difficult to resolve issues, on a scale never
really attempted before...

Globalisation has caused a variety political splits and alliances which
were inconcievable not so long ago and difficult to ... 

> be well

:)