Skip to main content

View Diary: Students Vandalize Recruiting Office (action pics and poll) (90 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  NOT justifying the recruiting lies (0+ / 0-)

    I HATE them.  Because I know what they involve in terms of stop loss and  indefinite extension (they tried to use that on my husband). But vandalizing a recruiting office doesn't just say "Recruiters lie. Stop it"--it says the troops are the bad guys as well--ESPECIALLY in light of Nam and the way vets were treated.

    Unless the signs target recruiters specifically, it comes across as dissing ALL of the military--including the many on our side.  

    We need to say we REALLY support the troops--by working to get better VA hospitals, better bennies for those maimed--but deplore the lies,whether told by recruiters or the prez.

    BIG difference in approach.

    The last time we mixed religion and politics people got burned at the stake.

    by irishwitch on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 11:52:56 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  is there room for both? (0+ / 0-)

      reality...is the result of war between two rival groups of Programmers

      by buhdydharma on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 12:09:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I don't think so. (0+ / 0-)

        Because what comes off is an attack Ont he military, the troops themselves--and it gets people thinking the way some of the younger folks here are already thinking that military =killers/evil/monsters (not many, but enough to be depressing).

        My husband suggested a BETTTER way to handle the recruiters: and out FACT SHEETS to anyone going in. It means having people there in shifts--but it'll do more good and be more responsible than being vandals IF the reason is to attack lying recruiters. I fit's to attack the military itself--then I don't and won't approve because we are attacking our own.  Go after the policy makers. AMarch to Congressional offices when the jerk is home. March to the Senators' offices.  Make THEM know that they will lose a LOT of votes if they continue supporting Bush.  Blame the people who gave us the war--the pols.

        The last time we mixed religion and politics people got burned at the stake.

        by irishwitch on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 06:14:56 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  consider this, please (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Kayakbiker
      vandalizing a recruiting office -- or any other facility that operationalizes public policy with which one disagrees (passionately) -- actually does disrupt that facility's current and/or onging processes (e.g. recruitment and enlistment, public education, worship). normally, vandalism is not a personal affront; it is at once a symbolic and political attack. property damage or defacement is literally and figuratively  "collateral" damage to the processing and means you eloquently describe.

      disruption of systematic organization is the purpose of all civil disobedience.

      what vandalism "says", when an act (e.g. graffitti, red paint, burning autos) fails or is expected to fail to disrupt the system which it rejects, is that "i am defeated. i am powerless." so is it so surprising some students also volunteered to clean up the red paint?

      these acts are indeed literary devices, fiction, subject to interpretation or interrogation. is it so surprising then that graffitti "artists" managed to achieve a fashionable status in art markets?

      but why did some students "volunteered" to escalate violence in their protest? arrests are an incremental measure of systemic dysfunction. so many small, personal sacrifices at home in fact bolster the number of casualties and dead returning from abroad who are, who remain, dependents of a moral corrupt political government. would ribbons suffice?

      now, imagine a circle -- as in systems notation -- a closed circle without breaks or environmental information (injunctive feeds to/from independent circles). this circle represents international war. one of the missing circles is the VA's economies; its dependents swell while funding shrinks, because its administration is NOT systematically responsive to war creation. now, the other circles are external influences on shrub llp decision agenda -- and are excluded.

      in fact, the predicament in which we find ourselves is not a war of words. it is the calumny of death, as you indicate. so targeting one point in the circle of war, the source, if i may say so, of manufactured soldiers and vets, its collateral, is both proper and fitting to the purpose of civil disobedience.

      ask yourself once again, is this tactic more or less instrumental to disrupting war OR fomenting war? is this tactic more or less instrumental to supporting the enlisted nation's military?

      Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.

      by MarketTrustee on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 11:10:21 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (122)
  • Community (57)
  • Elections (39)
  • 2016 (37)
  • Environment (36)
  • Bernie Sanders (33)
  • Hillary Clinton (30)
  • Republicans (29)
  • Culture (28)
  • Media (27)
  • Climate Change (26)
  • Spam (23)
  • Congress (23)
  • Education (23)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (21)
  • Labor (21)
  • Law (20)
  • Barack Obama (20)
  • Texas (20)
  • Science (19)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site