At 10:23 30/09/99 +0200, Martin William Smith wrote:

>Protesting dishonestly?  Yes, that is a cop-out.

Deliberately misrepresenting what I said is perhaps not the best debating
tactic to use.  Martin, protesting is a lot more than holding a rally and
then going home.  You apparently don't realise this.

>actions should match my beliefs consistently.  I'm not as successful
>as I would like to be.

Who is?  It's difficult to have your actions meet your beliefs all the
time, particularly when your beliefs are far enough outside of mainstream
beliefs.  I believe work as we know it is demeaning and dehumanising, and
that no-one should have to do it.  Yet I've still got a job.  I also don't
believe in owning property, yet I still pay rent.

>In a way, it is like the effect of overusing antibiotics.  The
>bacteria mutate to defeat them.

All this is fine, but it in no way invalidates protest.  What's the
alternative?  Protest aims (in the short term) to get mass support behind a
particular idea in order to ensure it succeeds.  For example, protest
brought down Suharto in Indonesia, and stopped new powers for the military
going ahead.  Not protesting would have ensured that Suharto remained in
power, and that the TNI was even freer to do whatever they want.

>I'm doing one step now.  I'm raising the issue.  Like it or not, the
>idea has been suggested to you.  You will think about.

Don't patronise me.

>I don't mean that all activist activities are dishonest and negative, but
>the futile protest is.

How do you know a protest is futile before it even begins?  Protest in
Australia - over many years - is one reason why there are now Australian
troops on the ground in East Timor.

>I don't know.  Talking about it a first step.  Pointing to the
>problem.

To who?

> > No, you're still hiding them.  You claim "most" protesters are dishonest,
> > yet you refuse to say which ones.  You say that protesting is a waste of
> > time, yet you do not say how you would accomplish your goals.  You're not
> > going to redesign the UN by asking nicely.
>
>I don't know what else to tell you.

Which protesters are dishonest?  Groups are fine - I don't mean for you to
label every individual.  Give some steps as to how you'd set about
reorganising the UN.  An activist would - presumably - assist in the
organisation of rallies.  At the same time, elected representatives would
be contacted, and pressured as much as possible.  The campaign would be
internationalised where possible, particularly in the countries most
affected by the veto powers.  Popular support would have to be shown to be
behind the reforms.

I'm not entirely sure that you've not being naive.  I presume that you're
intelligent enough to realise that the countries that benefit from the veto
power aren't going to act in opposition to their own
self-interest.  They're well aware of the 'problem' with the veto powers
(only they don't see it as a problem).  They're aware of the opposition
perspective, because it's pointed out at the UN all the time.

Alister