Thought for the Day

I have decided that I no longer have anything to say to people who can, with a straight face, defend this nonsense. Forget about race. Forget about class. Forget whether or not Gates or Officer Crowley are nice guys who treat their mothers well. The bottom line here is that an officer used the authority of law to restrict the liberty of a man who was expressing displeasure with him. If you think that is right, then you fundamentally disagree with the basic principle of a free society.

That is not hyperbole. If you are willing to grant any individual with a gun and a badge the authority to arrest people because they don't like them, then you and I share no common principle on liberty and the right of people to be free from oppression. None.

— comment on "The Rage Of A Privileged Class", seen via Feministing

R2P

Here's an interesting United Nations panel about the Responsibility to Protect doctrine; Noam Chomsky is one of the panelists.

There's one great moment in which one dude was saying, "Sure, the nature of the security council (which would have to be the gatekeeper of R2P) is flawed, but it's all we got, so we've got to go with that." and Chomsky says, "Well, if there was popular support for the idea, the U.S. could be encouraged to give up its veto right."