Jump to content

Environmentalist group protests Bank of America


monsoon

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 146
  • Created
  • Last Reply
I agree. It's too easy to hide behind 'law and order'. It's like an employeer hiding behind company policy instead of engaging with an employee. Or, for that matter, a salesman hiding behind company policy to a customer. Sure, there's nothing wrong with it, just that it won't win you any sympathy.

We're just too comfortable here in Charlotte, NC. :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am somewhere in the middle of the road on the debate going on around this, though I find the attitude expressed by those who are against the protest because it is against the law to be extremist and unthinking, and therefore dangerous. Being against something simply because it is against the law shows an inability to use the human brain we were all so blessed with, and makes one an ideal target to those who wish to dominate and deceive.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The protest was the culmination of years of trying to teach people, spread the news, etc. with seemingly little effect. So they have always been working within the law. As far as lawful means of protest, it hardly matters when the issue would be the lack of lawful recourse available to those who wish to stop, punish, sanction those who slowly kill the planet. It isn't available, as their actions are not illegal yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh - and regarding the ends not justifying the means and being taught to steal - I suppose you'd forgo all oil products that have on numerous occasions been pumped from ground stolen from their rightful owners, spilling their blood in the process? Remember to add murder to this great lesson on stealing. Being ignorant is not the same as being moral.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed. As consumers we are probably all ignorant. Materialistic products in the US come from all over the world, and we have no idea how they got here. Just that they look good on display at the store. Look at the attrocities that have come from "blood diamonds". It takes outcries and education on the subject for the world to realize what is really happening behind the scenes.

On this topic, I'm not sure how appropriate all the blame going to BofA is. If they didn't fund these operations, this country would be without power. Duke power, other power companies, and ourselves are more to blame. Duke for putting in the Coal plants, and ourselves for wasteful consumption. But I guess protesting BofA is more sexy and will reach a broader audience, whereas protesting Duke would be more on a local level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am somewhere in the middle of the road on the debate going on around this, though [(1)] I find the attitude expressed by those who are against the protest because it is against the law to be extremist and unthinking, and therefore dangerous. Being against something simply because it is against the law shows an inability to use the human brain we were all so blessed with, and makes one an ideal target to those who wish to dominate and deceive.

Holding laws to be sacred and followed blindly is historically how oppression is born and great harm done in the guise of the good for all. It is tangential to this topic but do you otherwise ignore the multitude of laws that are subversive in this country, and the dichotomy of our 'land of law' in which justice is meted out based on financial means and the personal attributes of the accused?

The protesters did engage in a dangerous and stupid stunt, and likely did so fully understanding the risk of harming innocents, but [(2)] that is becoming the only way to get people to wake up in a country in which the masses are sleeping on reality's watch. That is why we can decry the harm the protesters might have done, especially if they had killed someone, and yet blissfully ignore the many slow killers present today. This general attitude is what forces these kinds of extreme actions.

Speaking for myself, I was not aware that BoA approved of such actions (even if only by proxy), so while I am against the protest, it did serve to inform me of something that I feel I really need to know, and so it has accomplished it's goal, at least concerning myself. So no small irony that the justification for this protest can be wrapped up and packaged in the ideal of "the greater good", just as can the application of The Law.

Perhaps technically a good option, certainly worthy of elementary school reading circles, fairy tales, Sunday school and other such morality training programs, but completely naive and out of touch with reality. To, I'd say, most of the people living in this world. It reads as if you aren't thinking about things from the perspective of one who doesn't have the options inherent in your solution.

Oh - and regarding the ends not justifying the means and being taught to steal - [(3)] I suppose you'd forgo all oil products that have on numerous occasions been pumped from ground stolen from their rightful owners, spilling their blood in the process? Remember to add murder to this great lesson on stealing. Being ignorant is not the same as being moral.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There in lies the harm, and the source of my comment on following a law for the sake of the law itself, of the danger of that line of "thinking" - if people are too stupid, apathetic, etc. to make that possible then we are doomed to the evils of the system as it currently is. That reasoning is itself disingenuous, and the kind of reasoning that is behind nearly every tyrant and genocidal leader.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There has been some great discussion in this topic for both sides of the argument. I still agree more with the side that is against the protest due to the fact that they were illegally trespassing on private property. I understand the arguments about blindly following laws and not questioning right or wrong, but how many of the folks on this board would stand by and done nothing if a group of protesters showed up on your front yard and hung a banner ridiculing you in front of all of your neighbors? I know that I would either deal with the guys myself or call the cops. The key point here being that they were on MY property when I did not want them to be. The law protects my property rights the same as it does Bank of Americas. I wouldn't stand for protesting on my property and I wouldn't expect them to either.

Also, it really amazes me that people here are so shocked to hear that BoA provides loans and finances to the coal industry. Sure, you might not have specifically known that they do, but to be surprised that the largest bank in America provides money to one of the largest industries in America? Of course they do, as I'm sure almost all large banks in this country do. In fact, I would guess that if the research was done, it would be extremely hard to find a bank anywhere in this world that did not provide money to some form of industry, be it coal, oil, mining, etc, that harms the environment.

Anyway, great discussion and I have learned a lot just reading this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure I follow your thoughts, but if you are implying that a free society that follows laws blindly follows tyrants, I strongly disagree. It is our law, and our respect for it, that allows America to flourish. Our law gives power to the citizens.

However, I would agree with your logic if we are discussing Saddam and his oppression.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...how many of the folks on this board would stand by and done nothing if a group of protesters showed up on your front yard and hung a banner ridiculing you in front of all of your neighbors? I know that I would either deal with the guys myself or call the cops. The key point here being that they were on MY property when I did not want them to be. The law protects my property rights the same as it does Bank of Americas. I wouldn't stand for protesting on my property and I wouldn't expect them to either.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Referencing the numbered excerpts (above):

1. Extremist and unthinking? Of all the circles I've ever discussed 1st Amendment rights vis a vis effective advocacy and real world applications, those "opposing" the means of protest on this forum have been some of the more well-reasoned, thinking and unextreme. I'm surprised that this is your take - are you exaggerating?

2. Ironically enough, one of the greatest luxuries (and, yes, not-to-be compromised rights) of a representative democratic form of government is THE RIGHT to be asleep on reality's watch. That's why voter turnout is not quite the problem that people make it out to be. I used to be very politically literate. As time went on, due to different factors, I'm less-and-less politically literate. I just don't care as much. The great thing is that it doesn't matter (to me). The system seems to stay on the rails and the rails are going in the right direction (for me). (I understand that this will earn no points among most forum members, but it's at least illustrative of what keeps so many people from giving a damn).

3. I understand that you're trying to make a point about moral relativism, but I have no idea what example you're trying to frame. Will you provide historical context or more information?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Many environmentalists, for example, are extreme in their tactics, and I do not ignore that which is why I said I do not agree with the protest (on the grounds of causing harm to persons and property). But there is a not so subtle difference - the environmentalist is resorting to extreme tactics, not because they are extremists themselves but because the problem they seek to address is being ignored or perverted to appear benevolent or wrong. So I see that as extremist action, not extremist thinking. The extremist thinker is one who hates those not of his race, sexual orientation, religion, or any of a number of things, and who is incapable of seeing someone else
Link to comment
Share on other sites

......

Also, it really amazes me that people here are so shocked to hear that BoA provides loans and finances to the coal industry. Sure, you might not have specifically known that they do, but to be surprised that the largest bank in America provides money to one of the largest industries in America? Of course they do, as I'm sure almost all large banks in this country do. In fact, I would guess that if the research was done, it would be extremely hard to find a bank anywhere in this world that did not provide money to some form of industry, be it coal, oil, mining, etc, that harms the environment. .....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, there is a difference between a private residence and a relatively public area. Yes, in legal terms corporations are treated as citizens in many ways. But in reality, there really is a difference.

As a somewhat flip example, if I really, really, really had to use the restroom, I wouldn't hesitate to duck into a building owned by BoA just to use their bathrooms. Even though I don't work for them, have no business there (not even a checking account) and for all intents and purposes should not be on their property. Yet I'd never in a million years pop into someone's house just to relieve myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did some further research, as this conversation and thread have increasingly interested me to some extent and how I feel about the situation. I asked someone that worked for CMC and I would like to first appologize to RainTree21 about the medical situation. I guess it was my own ignorance to assume my viewpoint, but hearing someone from CMC, I actually have altered my opinion and facts on the protest and medical response issue. Fact is- CMC uptown only has a limited number of ambulences. 5-6 ambulences in posession (of course they outsource to the ambulence company), and one oversized ambulence for the childrens hospital. Each ambulence holds 1 victim. I know there are other hospitals and more ambulences around, but in the unlikely event that something tragic happened during this "immature" protest, we could have easily been out of resources and innocent people could have died. I was given an example by the CMC employee, what if an overturned truck came down on 4 or 5 cars on 77 or 85, for example. Each car had 4-5 people in them. That is 30 ambulences needed at minimum. I know this is farfetched, but is possible in an unlikely event. There are even more extreme situations that could involved a "Code ____" for CMC. I was told in the 2 years that this employee has been with CMC, it actually has happened once- but it was a code called requiring all medical personelle to go to the emergency room and drop all nonemergecy care. This means there are a lot of victims dealing with life and death situations that are going to need to be treated.

Now I know I am overdoing my statements a bit for very unlikely occurances, but if something were to happen during this protest, which you could say really unnecessarily involved medical personelle because 4 people wanted to illigally protest, this would have made much larger news and probally would have lost the credibility of what they were protesting in the first place. I still think it was right for them to raise awareness of the mining practices and funding, but should have been done in a different matter. Nonetheless, the stunt that took place I find sort of humorous and intelligent and very effective, although I truly support BofA as a hometown corporation and will continue to, like said above, we need the power. I hope in the future there is more awareness raised about the issue, I for one was too ignorant to recognize the problem, but hope that alternatives are made and government funding to help make cleaner, safer practices and alternatives to energy, and not so much blame corporations. They are just trying to do what's best with their budget for the community, aka Duke Power providing affortable power and BofA just doing what they do and lend money to companies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

As a small update to this topic since it got such a discussion here. The four individuals responsible for pulling off the protest, were arrested and charged with 1st degree trespass and released on $500 bond. The individuals were from NY, Fl, CA and one was from Asheville here in NC. My guess will be that none of them will serve any jail time for the offense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.