On Safety, Freedom, and Protest in 2004
Whether you're a "Liberal Weiner," or a "Right Wing Nutjob" there's one central theme most of our beliefs. Something that is central to most leftward leaning people, yet is also very traditionally a right wing, republican, feeling: the desire to uphold the constitution and the first 10 amendments.
The past 4 years have been trying for those working to uphold our personal liberties, and those of us traditionally on the left suddenly find ourselves on the flip side of an argument that was all too familiar just before 9/11.
The question is this: what risk, what cost, will you tolerate to cling to your constitutionally defined personal liberties?
When it came to the questions of gun control, many on the left were and are quick to say "sacrifice the liberty of the right to bear arms to protect the victims of abuse of that liberty." The right countered with the famous phrase "It's not about guns, it's about freedom," and we scoffed. We laughed at the idea of a government that would take it's power to limit constitutional freedoms and push further into our right to assemble, our right to free speech. This argument was about people dying at the hands of gun-toting criminals and kids (sometimes accidentally, and sometimes not) finding their way into their right-wing parents arsenal and killing themselves and each other. Republicans were were clinging to "freedom" as an excuse to keep their dangerous toys. Right?
4 years later, the tables have turned.
We're all suddenly understanding that maybe it wasn't just about guns. That maybe there was something to all of that rhetoric about limiting governmental control and the tendency of an empowered federal power to grant it self more and more control.
4 years later, our right to assemble has been deemed a terrorist-aiding activity. Our right to protest takes cops away from managing the already risky RNC here in New York.
Our right to bear arms, (or even protest signs longer than 2 feet, which are deemed weapons) to protect ourselves from a potentially abusive police power as they herd everyone over to the west side highway... Oh wait, we've already given that liberty up, haven't we?
4 years later, we're all suddenly willing to accept some risks to protect those freedoms. We're willing to accept the increased window for terrorist attack, the confusion and mayhem 250,000 people protesting in New York will cause.
The willingness to accept risk has just hit critical mass. The planners of the protests are powerless to corral their own people. The people have made their intent clear: they will protest where they can be heard, far from the fences and free speech zones. They will protest where they can be seen, and be arrested for it, teargassed for it, martyrs of "America as a free speech zone."
And protest has hit our our in-boxes, our cell phones.
Far from the West Side Highway, Smart Mobs will pop up in patterns, disrupting traffic in carefully orchestrated waves, keeping the police force thin and guessing, never able to stop a protesting crowd that uses text messages and cell-chatter to avoid the police and regroup around them.
The news has been brewing in the Internet underground, in emails, on IRC, on Usenet, for almost a year, and it's just now hitting the mainstream news outlets. It's blossoming into full fledged websites like www.xflashmobs.com and being passed from blog to blog, blanketing the Internet with an understanding of the gravity of this event.
This is not going to be an ordinary protest.
It's not about the Republicans, It's about Freedom.
References:
Tyranny in the Name of Freedom, The New York Times
High-TechLevels Protest Field, The Washington Times
TXTmobs take on the GOP, The Village Voice
http://www.appliedautonomy.com/
