Global unrest seems to be increasing in an almost geometric fashion -people are taking it to the streets pretty much wherever you look. Brazil being the latest, along with Turkey’s Standing Man protest.
It is very much a matter of class warfare, a gasping for air by those whose heads are repeatedly held under the water of inequity and oppressive policies.
Governmental and economic inequities aren’t confined to any one country or any one system, nor is the widening chasm between the haves and have nots, those with access and those who have none.
And always somewhere in the background corruption and corporate greed can be found, which are the real plagues- a global pandemic.
“Behind this mask there is more than just flesh. Beneath this mask there is an idea… and ideas are bulletproof.”
A quote from the movie V and truth lays within it.
You can kill the body but an idea whose time has come is a different story.
Protest is always viewed suspiciously, a level of paranoia accompanies it by those who it is directed against. Scenarios evolve of an armed revolt, barbarians at the gate-yet protest is the oldest of recourse to address grievances and there is no standard that it morphs into armed insurrection- no one is advocating for that, only to heard.
So much so tattered documents known as the Constitution and the Bill of Rights recognized and sought to preserve this right to protest.
As such protest should be welcomed-seen as an indication that people have a conscience and desire a voice, input in directions taken-an inherent right of all people.
When that right is routinely denied or ignored it is then that the Assanges, the Bradleys, the Snowdens , and the whistle blowers appear.
The value of protest is measured in part by what is accomplished or what is lost, but the reality is something greater.
In this day an age of immediacy, of needing instant gratification, if results aren’t immediate people tire, they become bored, the attention span and level of commitment wanes, they get juked and marginalized by the media-this lends itself to a waiting game and the addition of new props as the past becomes prologue.
Inequities that aren’t remediated don’t go away, and usually worsen.
The indigenous nations of this country have been protesting for over five centuries-it is only recently that our collective voice has been heard as a whisper in the courts.
If what a person or people would protest is valid then the obligation is to stay the course regardless of how long it takes.
There has never been a time when feudalism could be said to equitable, and it is difficult to describe the present system of wealth migrating to the top as anything less than a modern incarnation of feudalism replete with fiefdoms and a population defined by indebted serfs.
Sharecroppers, who despite the illusion own little they claim.
Some may deny this, and when they do motives should be examined, for as they say denial is something more than a river in Eygpt.
Governments are said to govern by consent-at least this government, and asserts that it does so by majority rule, when the majority dissent this rule then must be reflected in government or it is no longer representative, it no longer has consent.
One percent of the nations population hold an egregiously disproportionate amount of the wealth, and when legislation is examined it is their interests, what facilitates their wealth and the acquisition of more that is prioritized over the interests of the remaining ninety nine percent of the population- a recipe guaranteed to at some point lead to protest.
We are told that the existing level of domestic spying is essential to national security-to the well being of each person-yet a person is more apt to be killed by some nut running loose with an assault rifle than a a foreign terrorist, more apt to be killed in an auto accident, more apt to be killed in a home related accident.
Does this then translate to a mentality that we should be “protected” by say, having our bath or shower time monitored, or a daily inspection of the vehicles we operate?
Security -defense of the homeland are necessary, but not by stripping the individual of such things as the Fourth Amendment.
Not by Microsoft allowing known exploits to exist to facilitate the NSA or anyone.
Not by Google, Yahoo, Apple, or anyone kowtowing to and allowing intrusive programs.
The Supreme Court ruled in 1979 that no “reasonable” expectation exists when you send a letter or make a call.
Obviously the ’79 SC was flawed as there are various laws governing theft of mail-you can’t just arbitrarily open your neighbors mail for example-such laws are at least a minimal nod to a reasonable expectation of privacy.
Now we have FISA courts-who operate in the dark and are accountable to no one, and we are told this is both legal and constitutional, for our protection, and the question must be asked who protects us from the guardians?
Who would stifle our right to protest? Who guards the gate against the real barbarians?