Hasbinbad,
Don't be foolish. Nowhere have I said that all laws that were ever written are to be considered valid. What I will say is that no society can be viable in the long term without the creation and enforcement of laws. This is a universal truth.
I agree that not all laws are just which is why there are mechanisms in place to change and adapt laws as thoughts, cultures and morality experiences changes over time.
Where I part ways from the OWS folks is in the methodology that you implement to effect change in the existing laws. Should everyone be free to follow only the laws that they personally view are just? If I find it morally acceptable to stab you, should the law no longer be enforced? Or, if I find it morally acceptable to drive 100mph in a school zone is it an outrage when I get ticketed?
Is the correct method to enact change to just not abide by laws? I'm a fairly deep rooted conservative and I personally agree with many of the issues that OWS raises (apart from the obvious liberal / redistribution ones) and I believe that OWS could receive mainstream support across Republican and Democrats alike if the approach utilized was inside of the existing processes and a concise message was able to be delivered.
If you actually represent the '99%' (read: mainstream America) and want the movement to be able to actually enact change, then you would change tactics. (slightly) You have had marginal success so far but more and more people can no longer relate based on the methods used. Organize, deliver a clear message, form a 99% party even if that's what it takes, but violence & shanty towns & constant police presence & different viewpoints from each protester is killing your cause.
|