 |
| Image via ABC |
Having expressed my own reservations about the anti-hierarchical, intentionally leaderless nature of the Occupy Movement from the outset, I have, nevertheless, heartily endorsed it.
W.W. over at The Economist makes a fine argument for jumping off the fence and getting behind the protests, warts and all:
"I am not by disposition a joiner, but I'm nevertheless inclined to smile upon attempts to stick it to the man, even if the attempt is quixotic or confused and the man in the end remains unstuck. The Burkean horror of social upheaval is fine in its place, but there is no apparent danger of upheaval. And who among us doubts that the man deserves a good sticking to? So why not try?"
Read more
W.W. over at The Economist makes a fine argument for jumping off the fence and getting behind the protests, warts and all:
"I am not by disposition a joiner, but I'm nevertheless inclined to smile upon attempts to stick it to the man, even if the attempt is quixotic or confused and the man in the end remains unstuck. The Burkean horror of social upheaval is fine in its place, but there is no apparent danger of upheaval. And who among us doubts that the man deserves a good sticking to? So why not try?"
Read more
That's very cute! :)
ReplyDeleteThe whole piece is marvelous. Once again, the generally dry and often conservative Economist throws its weight behind basic concepts of expression and freedom.
ReplyDeleteI have not read the economist's argument, but I will do right away and then I will come back and leave you my insights on this topic
ReplyDelete