Take for example the reception of a recent Greenpeace action.
In one case, the protestors did nothing more than assert their true Constitutional Rights, in order to claim them; in the other, the protestors were merely breaking the law by trespassing and disrupting private business.
In one case, the protestors expected to get beaten; in the other, they were highly surprised to be met with resistance, their protest being seen more as a vehicle for self-fulfillment rather than an actual real-world struggle.
In one case, the marchers expected the world to be morally shaken by the spectacle of their treatment for peacefully asserting their Rights; in the other case, the anarchists met nothing but derision, mockery, and glee from the sight of their being pummeled.
That's because in one case, the protesters were true classic liberals; and in the other case, nothing but thugs intent on destroying the marketplace that supports Western culture.
It's actually instructive to read about the "Bare Witness" protest site, for proof about their motives and psychology:
While she doesn’t consider herself a “political person” or a “nudie” she organized the ‘NO BUSH’ protest driven by, what she described as a, “boiling over of self expression that was not popping out… it was bubbling over and I felt it deeply and I wanted to do something to release.”All about me. Ok.
“It’s more important for me to show people that they can break a social norm and once they have done it, it’s incredible self empowering to the individual.” When not pedaling nude, Schmidt programs computers for a living.Ah, yes, let's break all those nasty "social norms". That is by definitoin the act of an enemy of our civilization. When they've broken all social norms, our society is destroyed. So they can reform it in their image, presumably. We should take their aims seriously.
“It’s about not being reasonable anymore” says, Suzanne Hart, 49, an author from West Marin County, California who is nearing completion on her book titled, ‘Unreasonable Women Bearing Witness: Naked Vulnerability in The Face of Naked Aggression.’ “Being reasonable is calling your congressman and standing on the street corner with a sign ” but that doesn’t get you on the front cover of a newspaper or a spot on the evening news.Oh my. A LOT going on here! Latent exhibitionism, for example -- I want to be on the front cover! And an open declaration of not being reasonable, of not participating in the democratic process like a civilized person!
They already know they won't get their way by legitimate means, so they conclude that rather than being wrong, they have to circumvent our carefully constructed Constitutional political process.
This is by definition subversion and tyranny!
Recall that the original civil rights protestors expected the political process to ultimately work for them. But these people are rejecting reasonableness.
We should respond to them in kind.
