Our conundrum: People have a constitutional right to protest, I get that. Right, left, pro-life or pro-choice, Pro-Bernie, Pro-Donald, etc, sure. Wall Street elites and the Occupy Wall Street movement go after each other every day, too. How can we pick and choose who to deny?
Maybe we could put them all in an arena, the pro's and anti's on any subject, and let them duke it out. They could be 21st Century Gladiators, winner take all.
No, wait....Charlottesville. Bad Idea.
S
Decades ago I posited a solution to the left/right conundrum. Take all of the leaders of both sides, give 'em each a baseball bat, put them on a (small) island and surround it with gunboats so they couldn't escape, then let 'em sort out their disagreements however they liked.
ReplyDeleteI would submit it isn't a new conundrum. During the civil rights marches of the '60's we saw many bystanders in the south assail and assault those who marched for civil rights. Indeed, many of the police turned a blind eye and/or facilitated the assaults. The lesson of Charlottesville is preparation. They should extrapolate a phrase from the Plessy v. Fergusion decision: "separate but equal." In other words, recognizing the right of anyone to march or assemble in protest, they should set clear and substantial barriers to keep the two groups apart. Plan ahead, even if it involves bringing in the national guard.
ReplyDeleteIt doesn't matter how you separate them when someone decides to get in his car and run people over.
ReplyDeleteI don't mind it if extremists are allowed to speak because they usually harm their own cause. But rallies of hatemongers who only want to cause hurt and violence should not be granted permits on public property. But they should be allowed to speak somewhere.
ReplyDeletethen let 'em sort out their disagreements however they liked.
ReplyDeleteหนังใหม่