🚀 go-pugleaf

-----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.

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 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?

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

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

> 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.

> 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.

> > There really is no other choice.
>
> OH, BUT THERE IS...

Such as?

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.

> > 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.

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

[..]
> 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.


be well;

JC.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.3 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>

iQA/AwUBOYG7ORtSJZv2HzziEQIJHwCeOG1/XP9DKFDLdJqr8BLNCuxkVAUAn2+q
vkCMoV+u6ix7q1eesjcgz11c
=DhT/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----