6 ms·
Violence certainly does not represent the entire working class, but it is rare that you see Wall Street bankers rioting in the street.
by sliverstorm 13y ago
Violence certainly does not represent the entire working class, but it is rare that you see Wall Street bankers rioting in the street.
- LaGrange 13y agoNeither do you see the lottery winners rioting.
- discostrings 13y ago> but it is rare that you see Wall Street bankers rioting in the street That's more about privilege than about class. I'd love to see what Wall Street bankers as a class would come up with if they felt their livelihoods were at risk.
- maerF0x0 13y agoThey commit acts by other means. Why risk your pretty face when you can hire a thug? Why Protest in the street and risk bad publicity, hire someone else to do it. I'm not trying to pass judgment on which is "better" or right/wrong. Simply trying to indicate that different classes have different tools to achieve their aims.
- sliverstorm 13y agoSo if you agree the different classes act through different means, then do you disagree that rioting is pretty blue-collar, i.e. proletariat?
- GFK_of_xmaspast 13y agoYou don't need to riot in the street when you own the street.
- theorique 13y ago"We don't own the street. We are the street."
- pessimizer 13y ago> it is rare that you see Wall Street bankers rioting in the street. For the same reason you don't see CEOs snatching purses.
- aryastark 13y agoThey riot by calling the White House. "Too big to fail!" And yet, surprising, not too big to be considered a security threat to the entire United States. My, what lovely clothes you're wearing today, Emperor!