chocoloco said:
Nice to see you fail to see my point again. We are talking about one riot in one very violent city and you want to go and generalize that action to the whole movement. Closed minded thinking period. |
While I didn’t explain it initially, my first comment was primarily driven by how certain movements are portrayed than anything else. No matter how much violence or vandalism is displayed by the occupy group they will always be portrayed as a peaceful protest. No matter how much anti-Semitism is demonstrated, how many sexual assaults, or how little ethnic diversity is demonstrated by the occupy group they will always be portrayed as a tolerant and inclusive group. No matter how much material wealth they display in terms of their fashion and electronics, or how many expensive trips the members have gone on, they will be portrayed as impoverished victims of un unfair capitalist system.
When you contrast this with the Tea-Party movement who was portrayed as (nearly) violent extremists moments away from violent acts without evidence, racists without evidence, and the affordable middle-class clothing was used as proof that they were plants it becomes clear that much of the media is extremely biased.
As for my second comment, most of the time the hard-left (communists, anti-capitalists, and anarchists) protests riots and violence soon follow. Making a generalization about these political groups that they tend to be violent extremists is fairly grounded in fact and it is not unfair to these groups to classify them as such.
