Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
Pressure them. Personally. People do not resist explicit moral censure from large groups very well.

Under contemporary terrorist law, I suspect that the ECB would resist it exceptionally well.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Thu Feb 14th, 2013 at 03:15:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]
What aspects of contemporary terrorist law prevent the democratic expression of criticism and moral censure?
by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Thu Feb 14th, 2013 at 03:55:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The part where you are not allowed to make your criticism known by any means (such as picketing their place of employment) that cannot be deflected by any halfway competent secretary.

The suggestion was to personalize the matter. I doubt that any currently legal pressure tactic can penetrate their protective bubble of studied indifference to the opinions, or well being, of the hoi-polloi.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Thu Feb 14th, 2013 at 04:08:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]
By alluding to terrorist law, I think you're stretching a point.

It is possible today to get widescale movements of opinion going, and they may certainly include nominal criticism of persons in prominent public employment.

Possible, but difficult, I admit.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Thu Feb 14th, 2013 at 04:13:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]
But that's not the point Thomas was making. See above re. personalizing the issue.

The ECB governing council is (according to that view) a for all practical purposes a group accountable only to itself and its cronies. Public opinion, in this view, doesn't matter. At all.

So the suggestion was, as it was euphemistically put, to "pressure them. Personally."

And since we are for the most part talking about experienced Lysenkoist hacks, the legal avenues for applying effective pressure to their persons are unlikely to be effective. People who are persuaded to abandon politically convenient idiocy by the mere fact that it kills people don't tend to make it to the governing board of the ECB.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Thu Feb 14th, 2013 at 04:24:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]
JakeS:
legal avenues for applying effective pressure to their persons are unlikely to be effective

That much I agree with.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Thu Feb 14th, 2013 at 04:45:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Of course, I don't agree with the basic premise that the ECB isn't accountable either.

Pretending that the ECB is impartial and unaccountable, as if it were a court of sorts, is a shell game, not a serious statement of institutional reality.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Fri Feb 15th, 2013 at 02:00:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I think Thomas thoughts are spot on, if undeveloped. European Tribune - Does public opinion matter? With chart!
1. Can they affect you personally?
(Everything from a big payoff or nice lunch to being scorn at the supermarket or getting relatives whacked counts.)
==YES=> Ok, they matter. Weigh them against other concerns. (Like what benefits your position and power. Oh, and personal opinions if any are left.)
So of the top of my head, ways to reach them personally:

Rewards: Bah, we don't have the means. Not compared to what te other side can offer.

Punishments:

Clog the administration. ECB is a fairly small agency, so if there are requests they have to at least answer this is possible. Or if you can clog their lines of communication with requests from the public (this is essentially what happens when Amnesty gets going). But are there any such ways? Do ECB have to answer question from MEPs for example?

Reputational. ECB board members appear to prefer secrecy. Would they react to naming and shaming? This can be done online, but posters targeting them personally in their home cities could also get interesting.

Social. Everyone is sensitive to peer pressure. Blair apparently was, according to books about his fall. But is there any way to get their club members to scorn them? After all, the function of places like the City is to create a safe bubble. And I suspect terrorist legislation would be used if suffraget tactics were employed to make them and their peers feel uncomfortable.

Financial. Do any ECB members or immediate family own or by name are connected to major brands that can be damaged? Selective boycotts?

Physical. Not a fan. Even if one sets aside moral issues Sharp argues convincingly against trying to grapple with the state on the states strongest grounds.

Then we also have Thomas other suggestion which attacks this point:

European Tribune - Does public opinion matter? With chart!
4. Can your position and power be affected by voting? ==NO=> They do not matter
This needs to change and may be efficient to argue together with actions from the list above.

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se
by A swedish kind of death on Fri Feb 15th, 2013 at 02:13:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]
This was the basic premise of my unfinished novel on exactly this subject. Perhaps I should post some quotes.

It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue - Queen Elizabeth II
by eurogreen on Tue Feb 19th, 2013 at 10:50:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I think that could be interesting. If you are a bit stuck it could also perhaps be inspiring.

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se
by A swedish kind of death on Tue Feb 19th, 2013 at 02:16:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Oh, we're talking about "democratic expression of criticism"?

Thomas was talking about much more pointed action, bordering on harassment:

Pickets.
Boycotts (of the original, "noone will deal with or provide services to you, personally, for any amount of money" kind).
Arrange for their kit and kin to join the ranks of the unemployed.


I distribute. You re-distribute. He gives your hard-earned money to lazy scroungers. -- JakeS
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Feb 14th, 2013 at 04:26:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Among Thomas's suggestions only picketing really seems susceptible of falling under terrorism law definitions. He does also talk about democratic expression of criticism.
by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Thu Feb 14th, 2013 at 04:38:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The other two would lead to immediate arrest...

Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. Gandhi
by Cyrille (cyrillev domain yahoo.fr) on Fri Feb 15th, 2013 at 05:14:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series