Thom discusses the latest from the occupy Wall Street movement

Thom,

You were extremely harsh on an occupy (ws) spokesperson. I watched the show, and comrade, to the best of my knowledge, and I was educated in the US, the thirteen colonies were legally under British Governmental Rule. England was the legitimate government before the Revolution, like it or not! Therefore, the OWS person was correct in comparing: “OWS to George Washington” and his Band of Dirty Rebels. However, I could take the argument further, the “EMPIRE OF ENGLAND” WAS BETTER THEN THE EMPIRE OF GOLDMAN SACHS!!! YEA, OWS has A Legitimate Claim, and the hostilities raged against them are unjust/illegal persecution of their Rights!

Without Violence there will be No Change. This is not a Civil Rights movement, which nobody in the us government opposed then; however, this is a movement to “change a corrupt government” that has enslaved the American people. Lots of Corruption, Billions of Dollars … these people won’t give up their power without a Fight, which is why the Peaceful Protestors of OWS are getting their heads Busted.

Libya, Egypt … Syria … None of the So-Called Peaceful protests were peaceful. NONE! They all used violence. I remember the Molotov-cocktails (my favorite drink) hurled in Egypt’s Green Square and the Head beatings US reporters got from the Violent Crowd. LIBYA … PLEASE, that reminded me of the movie: “MAD MAX, THE ROAD WARRIOR!”

If you think the us government is going to acknowledge peace, then you need to look at their Deeds Abroad? Remember, Shock and Awe? These are Murderers in the Whitehouse; they won’t go without a Fight. If you don’t know this you need to open a History Book, comrade.

You don’t cast PEACE, or PEARLS, before SWINE! OWS has lost their objective, which was the NYSE, if you want “Change without a Fight,” then You better TARGET THE GREED/CORRUPTION and SHUT IT DOWN, PEACEFULLY; otherwise, OWS will OCCUPY a FEMA CAMP. Protesting in DC is foolish and is tantamount to going into the Wolfs Den, UN-ARMED, as the NDAA bill should verify.

Any time in history where black bloc-like tactics have worked? How about Egypt? Or perhaps, Mr. Hartmann, you are unaware of the street fighting and defensive actions against police that were part of the Egyptian uprising or of the informational flyers explaining how to use what are essential black bloc street tactics, not to mention the many police cars and stations that where burned?
The black bloc is a tactic, not a strategy, and where it is used it is used alongside other tactics as part of a larger strategic framework. This actually forms one of the strongest bases for critiquing the use of a black bloc tactic and its appropriateness and effectiveness for any given situation. By not being clear about what diversity of tactics actually means and where black bloc tactics, many of which are non-violent, may fit into that diversity, one actually undercuts some of the best grounds for accurately critiquing them. 

An honestly interesting show, Thom; but your interview advice 'on violence' was theocratic, possibly puritan, but thus in either case, Statist. From a media communications perspective, you may have objectivity ground to landscape in this territory. You were addressing a citizen who is not in agreement with the legitimacy of the State. Theocratic, puritan injunctions of [love vs. hate] are as historically proven to be irrelevant to the state as they are to the citizens demanding—through material action upon the borders of notional ownership—renewed conditions of governance. If your interviewee had been smashing temples, synagogues and churches, your office of response may have been more coherent. That is, if it could be proven that these institutions, and their media content, are anything more substantive than class–interested institutional mass molification. Certainly, your guests remarks about the general failure of leadership at all levels of social and cultural groupings are in crisis. Playing three card monty with one issue addressed in one frame with the other is tempting I am sure; but this is the type of thinking that yields us all the untenable qualia of our present leadership.