It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why left-wing protestors tend to riot

page: 2
17
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Danbones
The political use of the terms as opposed to the moral use of the word "right"...
Labeling political statements by such Hegelian terms as left and right has been shown to be a completely totalitarian brainwashing concept designed to prevent independent thought.


Exactly. The right/left paradigm is way out of date. It is mental masturbation in my eyes. It boils down to wanting to be right, and prove someone else wrong. I am better than you, and I will use my political indoctrination to show yours is inferior. You can dress it up in the garments of argument, but at the end of the day most would rather prove the other person wrong rather than encourage them to think differently.

The sad part of this reality is that it allows the power structure to literally get away with murder. We argue about issues that are provided for us, and we waste all our energy fighting each other. The whole time the elite laugh at how easily we are to rule. It is a rigged game. We wonder why everything in this country gets worse no matter which party is power. It is because the political dialogue is cover for the policies of the elite structure. It has always been the few powerful versus the voiceless majority.

Protests needing to be peaceful is an interesting assumption. Non-violent opposition, and gradual change are always preached as the only way. Pretty nice if you are in power, and use violence at will. Violence can often harm a group protesting, and should not be used lightly. There are times though when violence is useful, and even a moral duty. People who react with horror when protesters act violently should look at the scale of state violence first. How many millions of human lives would have been saved if the people had risen in a short act of violent overthrow of immoral governments?

I personally belief that mass civil disobedience is the best way. It gives a movement the moral high ground, and keeps loss of life limited. It can be just as effective as armed revolution.

When you make peaceful revolution impossible violent revolution becomes an inevitability.
edit on 9-2-2011 by stephinrazin because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-2-2011 by stephinrazin because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 09:57 AM
link   
Is everyone as sick and tired of people mindlessly mouthing the whole left/right BS lie as I am? The one thing the left hand and right hand have in common is they both work for the same body and are controlled by the same mind. The last ten years have made this obvious to anyone with a room temp IQ.

Reading threads like this makes me wonder if they have paid people here posting this crap because no one could be this naive these days



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 10:00 AM
link   
reply to post by lastrebel
 


You maybe right, the op i first met arguing that a nwo doesn't exsist , his avatar may indicate other issues too .



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 10:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Doomzilla
 





If i protest i ALSO protest peacefully - However I am neither left or right wing , I do not subscribe to this false paradigm , Therefore to me and others your op is flawed ,


Protest of course are absolutely useless because the media is controlled by the BANKERS and has been since 1917!


But you are correct. The left and the right or the Democrats and the Republicans are just two branches of the same philosophy. The only difference is one believes in the violent over throw of the Constitution and the other believes in a long term stealth attack on the Constitution.

In both cases the objective is the same to remove the rights of the individual who grants THEIR rights to the government through the Constitution and replace it with the right of the government to RULE the people. In other words the elite WANT the Government to have the POWER to GRANT or REMOVE the rights of the people. They use all the various "isms" Socialism, Communism, Nazism, Fascism, and Neoconism to get people to give them that right. That is the GROUP (government) has more rights than the INDIVIDUAL (the people)

Unfortunately the people of the USA have not seen the trap in that type of thinking and have fallen for it hook, line, and sinker so we now have the rule of Government (run by the elite of course) instead of the Rule of Law (Constitution) which protects the individual from an overbearing and corrupt government.

Here are examples:


In July 2000, USDA officials claimed in our court hearing that, “The farmers have no rights. No right to be heard before the court, no right to independent testing, and no right to question the USDA.” Linda Faillace




* "There is no absolute right to consume or feed children any particular food."

* "There is no 'deeply rooted' historical tradition of unfettered access to foods of all kinds." [p. 26]

* "Plaintiffs' assertion of a 'fundamental right to their own bodily and physical health, which includes what foods they do and do not choose to consume for themselves and their families' is similarly unavailing because plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to obtain any food they wish."


* "There is no fundamental right to freedom of contract."

FDA's Response to FTCLDF Suit


The United States Constitution states: no person shall "be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."

Due process of law means a court hearing and conviction by a jury of his peers. It does NOT mean the government confiscating our rights through the Under Color Of Law.


Section 242. Deprivation Of Rights Under Color Of Law: Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any inhabitant of any State, Territory, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such inhabitant being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if death results shall be subject to imprisonment for any term of years or for life.
stopthedrugwar.org...



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 10:46 AM
link   
This isn't a very good connection. You show me an out-of-control rioting liberal and I'll show you two right-winged bubba-effected gun-toting domestic terrorists.

Now if you want to be stupid about all this, be my guest. If you want to be realistic, then you need to admit that, if real change through the people will ever occur, it will be by the people working together to change their oppressors. Not by playing "who's the biggest psychopath".



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by lucid eyes
When right-wingers protest, such as at the Tea-Party, they protest peacefully, holding up pickets or eating hot dogs or engaging in debate. When left-wingers protest, they riot, shout, throw tantrums, commit acts of violence, vandalize cars and buildings, assault police. Why is that so?


Really? Is that why those tea party (peaceful) protesters verbally assaulted my mother when she attempted to 'engage in a debate', and then surrounded her car and proceeded to bang their signs on it, and then chased the VEHICLE as we drove away...?

Lets see...

Rioting-- okay, not quite.

Shouting-- definitely

Throwing Tantrums-- I've seen two year olds in fits of rage act with more dignity and decorum.

Commit An Act of Violence-- Violent enough to be intimidating and really scary.

Vandalize Car(s)-- Meh. Some scratches and dents, but it's the thought that counts.

Well, we've got four out of seven anyway.

These were all men by the way. My mother is 4'10" and about a buck 20. I'm 5'2" and about a buck 10. She did not shout. She did not demean. She simply voiced an opinion that disagreed. (I didn't say a thing by the way. I know spittle-spewers looking for a fight when I see them.)

Now, I happen to know many intelligent, reasonable tea-partiers. It sounds like you do too. You might even be one. However, they apparently weren't there that day. Long story short, my experience locally with their protests is the exact opposite of what you describe, and precisely what you accuse a left-wing protest to be characterized by. In some circumstances it only takes a few outspoken voices that are off their rails to make the whole thing blow up. It spreads like a disease. That's people, not a political/religious/cultural affiliation. Just people.

I'm not saying that left or right is any more (or less) prone to peaceful protest, or riotous violent ones. I think both sides are equally prone to either frankly. However, I find your attempt at painting ALL tea-party protesters with a rose colored brush a banal attempt at misleading propaganda.

Moving on. Now this little gem just irritated me to no end...


Originally posted by lucid eyesI wont pass judgement on which type of protest is better or worse, but I´ll say that right/left are really two different worlds with two totally different brains.Of course progressives learn from their heroes and literature. These are some Che Guevara quotes that reveal a mentality that could easily incite violence.


This ^ ranks as one of the most poorly crafted obligatory I'm-not-judging-but... pieces of hypocritical double speak I have seen. This completely discredits you as the measured, reasonable 'debater' you seem to be attempting to portray. You're not even trying. C'mon now.



Originally posted by lucid eyesDiscuss: How should we deal with the hate? How should we deal with rioting protestors? Is violence a legitimate means of protest?


I suspect that whether or not you would decide that violence was a legitimate means of protest would be at least partly dependent upon their political affiliation. Personally, I think violence is on rare occasion a legitimate form of protest in circumstances of severe oppression in it's many manifested forms. However, it must be the means of last resort. Sometimes that is the only way to get "Their" attention.


Originally posted by lucid eyesIn my view more is destroyed with rage than achieved.


Usually. I would like to point out that I suspect quite a bit of frustration, some anger, and (possibly) even some rage is coloring your opinion of 'the left'. There certainly at least does seem to be an emotional investment in painting one black and the other in rainbows. On that note...

Assigning a moral superiority to one group, castigating another for their 'flaws', while glossing over, or just flat ignoring the very same failings manifested within the (alleged) "morally superior" group is the worst kind of hypocrisy. Not to mention the most common foible in the human psyche that leads to self-righteous justifications of atrocities against other human beings. This is one of the fall back tricks to manipulate the masses to violence, either committing it or simply accepting it. Just remember, the other side (in this case "the left") are saying the very same things about 'the right"; (only with different quotes to be sure.
)



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by whaaa
Here's your right wing protests....


Those are good counter-examples.


(Of Course American right-wingers are more the conservative, decent type and not really comparible to Neo-Nazis in jackboots).



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 11:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Frankenchrist
You mad OP?


Seeing as how the OP's other thread labeling the entire left as promoting a lifestyle that leads to and embraces child rape is a miserable failure, I would guess yes.

Lucid Eyes, your agenda cannot get any more transparent than this.



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cuervo
This isn't a very good connection. You show me an out-of-control rioting liberal and I'll show you two right-winged bubba-effected gun-toting domestic terrorists.


what gun-toting right-wing terrorists? I am not aware of any conservative/right terrorist acts in the US in the last 50 years aside from T McVeigh. as the op opined, Tea Party functions were the epitome of civil actions. compare to the green riots in Seattle, etc.

re; Gov Palin; she was hounded out of office by a partisan AG who launched a series of unfounded investigations on her and her family, knowing she (as opposed to wealthy individuals like John Kerry and Nancy Pelosi) lacked the wealth to fight the courts and was thus forced out.

imho liberals substitute politics for religion, hence the emotional frenzy.



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 12:05 PM
link   
reply to post by lucid eyes
 





Have you ever attended right-wing and left-wing protests? I have. They are two different worlds. Im just trying to find out what motivates the left to conduct themselves the way they do.


Just out of curiosity. Did you notice if there was any difference in the "normal" age for each group???



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by crimvelvet
Just out of curiosity. Did you notice if there was any difference in the "normal" age for each group???


Conservatives tend to be older, liberals tend to be younger.



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 01:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by works4dhs

Originally posted by Cuervo
This isn't a very good connection. You show me an out-of-control rioting liberal and I'll show you two right-winged bubba-effected gun-toting domestic terrorists.


what gun-toting right-wing terrorists? I am not aware of any conservative/right terrorist acts in the US in the last 50 years aside from T McVeigh.


Aside from McVeigh? Is that all? Just pretend he doesnt count.
How about this?
"Proud Right Wing Terrorist!"



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
So your gonna keep quoting Che Guevara,


I was looking for explanations of why left-wing protests always involve tear gas.



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 01:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by lucid eyes

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
So your gonna keep quoting Che Guevara,


I was looking for explanations of why left-wing protests always involve tear gas.


1) as noted, the lefties tend to be younger, hence more excitable and emotional
2) older/conservative types more self-controlled.
3) 'traditional values' of restraint and respect for people/property on the right. lefties, not so much.
4) anger and rage on the left, concern on the right. by definition, takes a lot of 'concern' to get people out in the street.
5) conservatives are more likely to be working for a living. lefties, not so much. yes, this is a generaliztion, but I think well founded. think; college students vs active-duty military.



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by stephinrazin
Exactly. The right/left paradigm is way out of date. It is mental masturbation in my eyes. It boils down to wanting to be right, and prove someone else wrong. I am better than you, and I will use my political indoctrination to show yours is inferior. You can dress it up in the garments of argument, but at the end of the day most would rather prove the other person wrong rather than encourage them to think differently.


Left/Right being an Illusion doesnt change the very real acts of violence and damage. Smashing the window of my car is not mental-masturbation, its real-life agression that was driven by ideology.



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 03:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by crimvelvet
Protest of course are absolutely useless


True. But thats another story.



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 03:38 PM
link   
Generally the opressed turn violent, yes. Hardly surprising.

The right don't turn violent because they support said opression, and are responsible for implimenting it.



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 03:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cuervo
ou need to admit that, if real change through the people will ever occur, it will be by the people working together to change their oppressors.


We dont consider people in suits "oppressors".And we dont seek "change" at the expense of those people. Thats all left-wing ideology.



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 03:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by redhorse
I think both sides are equally prone to either frankly.


Then show me a conservative gathering in which the police had to use tear gas against protesters.



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 03:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by works4dhs

Originally posted by Cuervo
This isn't a very good connection. You show me an out-of-control rioting liberal and I'll show you two right-winged bubba-effected gun-toting domestic terrorists.


what gun-toting right-wing terrorists? I am not aware of any conservative/right terrorist acts in the US in the last 50 years aside from T McVeigh. as the op opined, Tea Party functions were the epitome of civil actions. compare to the green riots in Seattle, etc.

re; Gov Palin; she was hounded out of office by a partisan AG who launched a series of unfounded investigations on her and her family, knowing she (as opposed to wealthy individuals like John Kerry and Nancy Pelosi) lacked the wealth to fight the courts and was thus forced out.

imho liberals substitute politics for religion, hence the emotional frenzy.


My point is there are as many of each. But just off hand, what about all those "minutemen" psychopaths "patrolling"/murdering on our border? There are crazies on both sides so picking a fight like the OP did is just asking for pointless argument.

Just look at the Egyptians: The lefties were protesting and having a good ole' time then the righties (Hosni's goons) came in and started beating the crap out of reporters and riding camels through crowds.

It's just silly bringing it up if there is such great anecdotal evidence right on CNN right now contrary to your point right now. It's like a fat guy making fun of a skinny guy.



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join