By Jason Ibrahim. This morning, the Altoona Mirror reports, by way of the Associated Press, the impending start of the G20 economic summit in Pittsburgh. This summit is a mixed blessing for the city, for sure. While the summit will draw attention to the River City and bring with it a boon of additional commerce, it also brings a certain trepidation. No doubt thinking of the G20 summit in London earlier this year, Pittsburgh has put in place a near-total law enforcement presence so that residents and business owners don’t endure the same punishment Londoners faced in April, where protesters attempting to overthrow capitalism were met by policemen in full riot gear. The safety and property of Londoners was, in many cases, disregarded by the [protesters].
Contrast this with a protest that took place two weeks ago: over two million people converged on the Reflecting Pool in Washington, DC to reflect on President Obama’s egregious and unconstitutional trespasses on our freedom. The protestors brought their anger; they brought signs, and flags … and self-control. Can you find a credible link with an example of violence coming from the 9/12 Project protest? I certainly can’t, and I’ve looked, and talked with numerous attendees, who also describe it in similar terms. The safety and property of Washingtonians was—by every account I’ve seen—scrupulously maintained by the protestors.
Needless to say, there’s a great disparity here. The liberal end of the spectrum, ostensibly enamored with trailblazers like Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and Mahatma Gandhi, seem to have traded in the foundational principle common to both their philosophies—nonviolence—in favor of the might-makes-right tactics of Malcolm X and the Black Panthers. Why is this?
I don’t have authoritative answers on this one, but I do have a theory. Most of the chasm separating liberal from conservative thought centers around how an individual relates to their society. Are individual rights triumphant, or does society’s overall need win the day? Most people—of any political stripe—fall somewhere on the spectrum, rather than applying one extreme absolutely, but conservatives tend to champion the individual, while liberals favor the group as a whole. One of the tipping points in my becoming a conservative was the realization that trumpeting society above the individual harms both, in the long run, and preferring the individual over society gives you not just free individuals, but a just society to boot. Not a fair society—don’t hold your breath waiting for one of those—but a just one.
To me, the difference between the G20 protest and the 9/12 Project speaks volumes about the chasm in philosophies.
ILoveAltoona.com has produced the Blair County Family Fun Card. 
{ 3 comments }
Jason — interesting thoughts, but is it fair to use what happened in Europe as a reflection of American liberals? Although, I do agree with you that a person’s foundational philosophy affects his or her actions, attitudes, etc. Not all philosophies are created equal.
Absolutely. The philosophy that holds individuals accountable for their own success or failure beats the progressives any day. A guy who is held accountable will most likely learn from his mistakes, but if he’s just a part of society, he’ll never learn.
Lynn, my response to your question is two-fold. The first is to look at how protests are conducted at similar events in the US–it looks very much the same. Take a look at what protesters did in Seattle in 1999, to welcome the WTO: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Organization_Ministerial_Conference_of_1999_protest_activity . The most ridiculous part of that story is the liberal magazine The Nation stating that, while Molotov cocktails were not thrown at police and WTO representatives, they should have been. These are the actions being perpetrated by the Forces of Tolerance, mind you.
Also, take a look at how US liberals tend to be enamored with European policies and politics in general. This is a vast generalization, by itself, but I’m sure you could find plentiful examples along the same lines. Yesterday’s Mirror included a letter to the editor explaining why a weedkiller on the market in the US should be banned, and used as incontrovertible proof the fact that European governments have banned it, saying, “It seems to have worked for the Europeans. Their farms are doing just fine.” Unfortunately, far too many arguments tend to be dominated by that letter’s kind of faulty logic.
Comments on this entry are closed.