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.