Spooking horses is easy. Doing something useful is hard.
OK the London bombing didn't stop G8 last year, so I'm not sure that some assaulted horses and broken police windows will give the G20 much trouble.
I don't think a lot of the people who went there expected they would really stop the G20 either. Many of them probably didn't really even know what the hell it was, beyond what they'd heard from the fetid cake-holes of their anarchist masters. The G20 was set up in the wake of the asian crisis to be a more inclusive and representative collection of the world's finance ministers. As well as the obvious players, (The EU only counts for 1 of 20) there is India, Mexico, Indonesia, Brazil and South Africa.
Stopg20.org talks about India's GDP per capita being $700 odd when America's is $40,000 odd. Fair enough, and I think the Indian representative might have something to say about that this weekend because INDIA IS A PLAYER, NIMROD!
If something big is going to be done about global poverty, the solution is likely to be talked about here.
I think this is immaterial to a lot of protestors. For them, protesting is as much a social activity as it is anything else, it's like going to the cricket.
There are people who will say that at least they're doing something about poverty. Wrong. Something would be what's happening inside the G20, or on aid projects. Something is not some sanctimonious, marxist half wit causing a McDonald's to be shut down on McHappy day near the epicentre of the protest.
I've made a few posts about this sort of shit on this blog, so there's little point in repeating the stuff. "People who actually do good are rarely referred to as do-gooders" from January 2005 remains accurate.
I will add this. Worldvision think the G20 will be productive. These are people who, I'm told not only know and care a bit about poverty and equality, but from time to time actually do something about it.
Their approval says all about the the validity of the G20 that really needs to be said.
I don't think a lot of the people who went there expected they would really stop the G20 either. Many of them probably didn't really even know what the hell it was, beyond what they'd heard from the fetid cake-holes of their anarchist masters. The G20 was set up in the wake of the asian crisis to be a more inclusive and representative collection of the world's finance ministers. As well as the obvious players, (The EU only counts for 1 of 20) there is India, Mexico, Indonesia, Brazil and South Africa.
Stopg20.org talks about India's GDP per capita being $700 odd when America's is $40,000 odd. Fair enough, and I think the Indian representative might have something to say about that this weekend because INDIA IS A PLAYER, NIMROD!
If something big is going to be done about global poverty, the solution is likely to be talked about here.
I think this is immaterial to a lot of protestors. For them, protesting is as much a social activity as it is anything else, it's like going to the cricket.
There are people who will say that at least they're doing something about poverty. Wrong. Something would be what's happening inside the G20, or on aid projects. Something is not some sanctimonious, marxist half wit causing a McDonald's to be shut down on McHappy day near the epicentre of the protest.
I've made a few posts about this sort of shit on this blog, so there's little point in repeating the stuff. "People who actually do good are rarely referred to as do-gooders" from January 2005 remains accurate.
I will add this. Worldvision think the G20 will be productive. These are people who, I'm told not only know and care a bit about poverty and equality, but from time to time actually do something about it.
Their approval says all about the the validity of the G20 that really needs to be said.
posted by Mr Schrempp @ 9:35 pm
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home