Azelma wrote:
1. I didn't say they were only trolling employees
By way of exclusion you did.
Azelma wrote:
2. It was posed as a question with the direct intent to provoke discussion and be refuted
I don't believe for a second you made the statement believing it was clearly wrong.
Azelma wrote:
If I go into the post office, and urinate on all the mail , defecate in the P.O. Boxes, and disable a few mail trucks because I hate the US Postal Service's policy of not delivering mail on Sunday...am I really causing change,
Azelma wrote:
or merely inconveniencing the people who will now have to clean it up/fix it all?
OH #$%# PEOPLE GOT INCONVENIENCED
OMGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG
$%^% JUST GOT REAL
Azelma wrote:
Certainly the decision makers at the US Postal Service won't be affected by my random acts of carnage. Though they'll certainly have to deal with the message I've sent that "I am unhappy, so I'm messing your shit up" and the short-term loss of productivity.
You might as well argue, what's the point of going for any piece on a chessboard but the king? Why don't you just take out the king, you know, then your opponent loses the game?
"...well what do you think those other pieces are doing..."
Azelma wrote:
I'm just curious if it's the only way? Or if it's the absolute most effective way of doing things?
What, ask nicely?
This is why you're a pussy. This is the most benign and nonviolent example of political upheaval in the entire history of mankind, and even for you it's too much. Heaven knows what you'd do if you lived in the days of the Bastille or Boston Tea Party or race riots or any other era where, in the face of conflict and uncertainty, men were expected to be at least somewhat manly.
I mean, seriously Azelma, what would you do?
Stand there and say, "Hey guys, maybe the British will stop taxing us / the nobles will stop oppressing us / the white people will stop discriminating against us
if we just ask real nice..."
And for all your complaining about my perceived arrogance or know-it-all, or sense of entitlement, is it not you second-guessing the whole business of what it takes to effect change in a society? Demanding an omelette (a free, fair and just society) without deigning to break any eggs? Isn't that a bit hypocritical - you want the rewards but not the cost?
Quote:
"Nobody can give you freedom. Nobody can give you equality or justice or anything. If you're a man, you take it."
-Malcolm X
If we were living in the days of the Cultural Revolution, perhaps you could say, well gee, killing random people in the streets is a bit much, can't we work our problems out some other way? - out of an abhorrence at the extreme means being employed. The grossness of violence hardly applies here as a basis for an objection. So given that the means employed are not inherently inhumane or offensive, any objection must stem from the belief that there is simply a better approach. Such a belief, in turn, must find its genesis in a definite idea, otherwise, what you have is a sort of idle daydream.
So: do you actually have any better ideas?
