Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgaryborn
If you are talking about the Tea party movement there is some significant differences. The Tea party's ralleys were well organized and they did have permits and kept the peace. There was not one arrest associated with the Tea party and they cleaned up after themselves. The Tea party used the ralleys to get their message out and then used their foot army to promote candidates who they helped get elected.
Political activism is great! It shows you care for your country. Civil disobedience is another thing. It should only be used when the legal avenues for change have been blocked or at the very least exhausted.
You might oppose the Tea party's ideology but, you should acknowledge that they were effective in their reach and by being smart politically proved a lot of their detractors wrong. Can this 99% movement achieve the same? Maybe but, they seem to be starting out on the wrong foot.
|
They (TTPM) haven't been effective in their reach at all, they've only got their own base going, and the most radical of those at that. They were the ones who already felt that way anyway.
The Occupy movement has hit something like 60 cities worldwide! The Tea Party movement only has supporters in the States, and only ever will.
We can argue which is the better (or more legal/moral) way to do it and yeah, there are differences with the movements there. I would argue many of the movements that have been important in history have had to exist outside the law to a certain extent. Whether it's in the Western world, or it's taking down a 3rd world dictator.
But I find the last part of your post humourous. The Tea Party movement isn't being accepted by anyone other than radical republicans. And it's not an issue anywhere else in the world. The Occupy movement is supported by people around the world, and even Time Magazine's latest issue has it billed as 'The Silent Majority' reporting that 57% percent of Americans sympathize with the protestors.