patron saints and protestors
it would seem that bukowski would be a good patron saint for this little crew given how much we tend to drink when we are together.
but really i wanted to comment on the posts about protesters. love it or leave it baby, that's what I say.
no, okay, you're right that is not what i say, but i agree in general that i have no idea what the protesters the past couple days have been trying to accomplish. if they've wanted to piss off sf commuters they've succeeded wildly.
i have to wonder how much of the traffic was actually caused by protesters as compared to what was caused by DPT closing off several important blocks to traffic. perhaps the protesters exacerbated the problem, but they were not the primary source of the chaos.
i think clearly there are people who like causing a ruckus, even just to piss people off, because it is a powerful feeling and an adrenalin rush. it makes it seem like you can actually do something. plus it's probably a good way to meet fun interesting folk. i disagree with che, these people probably do have good stories to tell. however, they probably have a tad too much earnestness and not quite enough cynicism for their own good.
most of these people probably think that i and other self-serving progressives of this town have compromised to much and that we need to take more direct action. they would be critics of my organization, which is considered to be "impotent" by many on the far left. these are all anti-wto/anti-globalization folk come out for a new day, and some of them are a hard core lot, a bit like deadheads.
i bring up self-serving progressives, because i would be interested to know what lays behind che's little quip, and how they might be the new mainstream.
there are serveral boatloads of different kinds of "progressives" in this city. you can create your own political club here. for further info, a great source for info on san francisco politics is www.sfusualsuspects.com
but really i wanted to comment on the posts about protesters. love it or leave it baby, that's what I say.
no, okay, you're right that is not what i say, but i agree in general that i have no idea what the protesters the past couple days have been trying to accomplish. if they've wanted to piss off sf commuters they've succeeded wildly.
i have to wonder how much of the traffic was actually caused by protesters as compared to what was caused by DPT closing off several important blocks to traffic. perhaps the protesters exacerbated the problem, but they were not the primary source of the chaos.
i think clearly there are people who like causing a ruckus, even just to piss people off, because it is a powerful feeling and an adrenalin rush. it makes it seem like you can actually do something. plus it's probably a good way to meet fun interesting folk. i disagree with che, these people probably do have good stories to tell. however, they probably have a tad too much earnestness and not quite enough cynicism for their own good.
most of these people probably think that i and other self-serving progressives of this town have compromised to much and that we need to take more direct action. they would be critics of my organization, which is considered to be "impotent" by many on the far left. these are all anti-wto/anti-globalization folk come out for a new day, and some of them are a hard core lot, a bit like deadheads.
i bring up self-serving progressives, because i would be interested to know what lays behind che's little quip, and how they might be the new mainstream.
there are serveral boatloads of different kinds of "progressives" in this city. you can create your own political club here. for further info, a great source for info on san francisco politics is www.sfusualsuspects.com
