The New Civility, Part 3,968

Occupy Wall Street anarchists and many progressives believe that property damage doesn’t hurt anyone. Back in May I wrote a piece noting that Brandon Kiley is just one of many self-loathing Americans who believes:

Smashing a window is not violence, it’s vandalism. There is a difference—unless you think of people as the moral equivalent of property.

-snip-

There is an enormous moral distinction between smashing a bank window and smashing a person. Lumping the two under the umbrella of “violence” is linguistically lazy and politically irresponsible. It is worth noting that in the dramatic property-destruction campaigns of groups like the Earth Liberation Front—burning SUV lots, ski lodges, and in one of their stupider and more infamous moments, a botanical research facility at the UW—people don’t get hurt.

At the time I pointed out that this moral disassociation was insane. I used the word sociopath. I sarcastically suggested that we burn down Brendan’s house as a protest, after all, we would be sure no one got hurt. But even I missed the forest for the trees: To these people, the building represents a facade for the evil corporation. Causing damage is victory. But the disassociation is even deeper than I gave credit for in my most cynical imagining:

Today, in Washington DC the Family Research Council was attacked and a guard shot by a lone gunman who reportedly stated, as he was taken into custody:

“Don’t shoot me, it was not about you, it was what this place stands for.”

If this is true it suggests we’ve come full circle: Like the buildings, the people in them are little more than an extension of the evil corporation.

“It’s nothing personal, dude.”

Sometimes, “I told you so” just doesn’t cut it.

This entry was posted in Society and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.