# On the brownshirtedness of NYC protesters: An update in the wake of the RNC. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [April 13, 2005, 5:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-the-brownshirtedness-of-nyc-protesters-an-update-in-the-wake-of-the-rnc/299094 "2005-04-13T05:36:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![tdn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/94ad74/32.png) [@tdn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tdn)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2005, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-the-brownshirtedness-of-nyc-protesters-an-update-in-the-wake-of-the-rnc/299094/61 "2005-04-13T19:37:44Z")
> [@Twin](#): > > Well, I wasn’t the first to use the term brownshirts. The OP did. Upon further reflection, the use of brownshirts is a little extreme. Replace all uses of brownshirts with rude cowards unwilling to hear an opposing point of view. I’ll also take your laughter as an admission that my point (and Shodan’s point) is valid. It’s amazing. Each sentence is stupider than the last. There’s an odd kind of symmetry to this post. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2005, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-the-brownshirtedness-of-nyc-protesters-an-update-in-the-wake-of-the-rnc/299094/62 "2005-04-13T19:44:03Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Even in cases where the video backed them up? Er, did you bother to read the OP? > [@](#): > > Last week, he discovered that there were two versions of the same police tape: the one that was to be used as evidence in his trial had been edited at two spots, removing images that showed Mr. Dunlop behaving peacefully. When a volunteer film archivist found a more complete version of the tape and gave it to Mr. Dunlop’s lawyer, prosecutors immediately dropped the charges and said that a technician had cut the material by mistake. In light of this, I have to regard any video tapes provided by the police as skeptically as a teacher would regard an absence-excuse note written in crayon and signed “My Mom”. ---
**Author:** ![Tracy\_Lord](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ec9cab/32.png) [@Tracy\_Lord](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tracy_Lord)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2005, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-the-brownshirtedness-of-nyc-protesters-an-update-in-the-wake-of-the-rnc/299094/63 "2005-04-13T19:44:19Z")
> [@matt\_mcl](#): > > Wouldn’t it have been fabulous if the Brownshirts actually _had_ used pies? "_Vaterlaaaaaaaaaaand!!_ _splut_ " HAH! I had never _literally_ spewed crumbs all over my keyboard thanks to anything on the SDMB until today. Well done, sir! Well done! (Now back to your regularly scheduled Pitting.) ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2005, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-the-brownshirtedness-of-nyc-protesters-an-update-in-the-wake-of-the-rnc/299094/64 "2005-04-13T19:44:43Z")
> [@Twin](#): > > Well, I wasn’t the first to use the term brownshirts. The OP did. Upon further reflection, the use of brownshirts is a little extreme. Replace all uses of brownshirts with rude cowards unwilling to hear an opposing point of view. I’ll also take your laughter as an admission that my point (and Shodan’s point) is valid. Wow. I hadn’t read your quote carefully enough the first time through–I thought it was a mildly funny bit of sarcasm. That you were sincere in what you wrote makes it freaking hilarious. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![tdn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/94ad74/32.png) [@tdn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tdn)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2005, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-the-brownshirtedness-of-nyc-protesters-an-update-in-the-wake-of-the-rnc/299094/65 "2005-04-13T19:52:43Z")
> [@](#): > > When a volunteer film archivist found a more complete version of the tape and gave it to Mr. Dunlop’s lawyer, prosecutors immediately dropped the charges and said that a technician had cut the material by mistake. Yeah. “Oops!” ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2005, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-the-brownshirtedness-of-nyc-protesters-an-update-in-the-wake-of-the-rnc/299094/66 "2005-04-13T19:57:20Z")
[This Brown shirter never got arrested:](http://www.dailypennsylvanian.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2004/09/20/414e80e9ee4dd) > [@](#): > > A New York ABC television affiliate captured footage of a Republican Youth Convention attendee dragging to the ground and kicking an AIDS activist who had entered the event undercover as part of a larger protest against the George W. Bush administration. > > The student in the video, whose name was unknown at the time the footage was taken, has been identified by several Penn students as Wharton junior Scott Robinson, a member of the Penn College Republicans. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2005, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-the-brownshirtedness-of-nyc-protesters-an-update-in-the-wake-of-the-rnc/299094/67 "2005-04-13T20:47:49Z")
> [@tdn](#): > > No, you most certainly have not. You have shown that more people got arrested in New York than in Boston. You seem to not get the whole idea of proving what political stripe the arrestees were. You simply assume that if a person got arrested in New York, that person must necessarily be a Democrat. You also assume that every arrest was due to an illegal disruption. You have not proven that, either. Did you notice that the word “arrest” is not synonymous with “conviction”? And you may also want to notice that I did not claim that every one arrested in New York was a Democrat. I asked why one party seemed to attract a hugely disproportionate number of those willing to break the law to protest at the convention of the other side. Certainly “brownshirt” tactics is hyperbole, although not by much. Brownshirts used to disrupt their opponents’ political rallies illegally. I am perfectly happy to accept **Twin** ’s distinction if it helps, however. _:shrugs:_ I suspect we are venturing into the area where people aren’t even reading all the posts before they react. > [@](#): > > You continue to assume that the disparate numbers of convictions at these events somehow directly correlates with overall tendencies among Democrats and Republicans, or liberals and conservatives. I presented a phenomenon as evidence of this as a conclusion, not an assumption. Protestors against the Republicans seem to be far more likely to engage in illegal behavior than those who protest against Democrats. This has been shown to be true, although not to the extreme degree indicated by raw arrest numbers. But, considering only convictions in a court of law, the disproportion remains. And I asked, “Why should that be?” And you, apparently bothered by my post, present figures which reduce, **but do not refute** , my conclusions. The rest of your post seems to be a hunt for something you can use to explain away the established facts. > [@](#): > > You fail to take into account the number of people convicted as a percentage of total protesters. Irrelevant. > [@](#): > > You still don’t know exactly who was arrested and/or convicted. Actually, the raw numbers of convictions is all that is necessary to establish [ul][li]that their behavior was illegal beyond a reasonable doubt, and [\*]that they were protesting against one political side or the other[/ul][/li][quote] You don’t, and maybe can’t factor in possible differences between the Boston and NYC police departments. [/quote] Probably “can’t”. > [@](#): > > And your argument takes no account of the fact that the group nbot currently in power (in this case, Democrats and liberals) have more incentive to engage in demonstrations and civil disobedience than those who support the current government. Also irrelevant. We are talking about behavior, not motivations. You may be correct that liberals are more motivated to break the law than conservatives. That is evidence in favor of my conclusions, not against them. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![tdn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/94ad74/32.png) [@tdn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tdn)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2005, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-the-brownshirtedness-of-nyc-protesters-an-update-in-the-wake-of-the-rnc/299094/68 "2005-04-13T21:07:56Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Did you notice that the word “arrest” is not synonymous with “conviction”? Tomato, tomahto. You’re still drawing illogical conclusions either way. > [@](#): > > And you may also want to notice that I did not claim that every one arrested in New York was a Democrat. I asked why one party seemed to attract a hugely disproportionate number of those willing to break the law to protest at the convention of the other side. In the first sentence you deny the claim. In the second you confirm the claim. You essentially state that Democrats are willing to break the law. And you assume that since they were convicted, that they broke the law, whereas the OP throws doubt onto that right off the bat. > [@](#): > > I suspect we are venturing into the area where people aren’t even reading all the posts before they react. I get that feeling too. > [@](#): > > I presented a phenomenon as evidence of this as a conclusion, not an assumption. You have an interesting definition of “evidence.” ---
**Author:** ![UncleBeer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/977dab/32.png) [@UncleBeer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UncleBeer)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2005, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-the-brownshirtedness-of-nyc-protesters-an-update-in-the-wake-of-the-rnc/299094/69 "2005-04-13T21:09:16Z")
> [@mhendo](#): > > Well, i bolded **Shodan** ’s name in the way that i bold the name of every single Doper that i refer to in any of my posts. If you care to examine my posting history, you’ll see that i use this device indiscriminately in order to make clear when i’m referring to a particular person. Right, referring to a particular person. As I said, it detracts from your main thesis when you emphasize an individual over the general case. Particularly when done repeatedly. > [@](#): > > It’s true that **Shodan** was a secondary target of my thread, mainly because it was specifically his comments that i used, and because they represented, to me, the most clear-cut example of what i was talking about. As to whether he was a “petty” target, i’ll leave that for others to decide—but i will say that anyone making generalizing allegations of brownshirt behaviour opens themselves up to criticism and even some scorn. So your original claim that this **wasn’t** a pitting of Shodan was simply an error? Or worse? This, along with attacking someone over something said months ago on which you couldn’t be bothered to comment contemporaneously, is what makes it petty. > [@](#): > > As for why i didn’t bring this up back when the thread was active, it’s because i never participated in that thread. The comments you’ve finally made would not have been appropriate for that thread anyway, so I don’t see what your participation, or lack of it there, has to do with anything. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2005, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-the-brownshirtedness-of-nyc-protesters-an-update-in-the-wake-of-the-rnc/299094/70 "2005-04-13T21:10:08Z")
You have shown no evidence that liberals were more willing to break the law. Getting arrested does not equal breaking the law. You have not proven that those arrested were liberals. You also assume that if conservative protestors don’t get arrested that they haven’t broken any laws or that they are unwilling to break the law. ---
**Author:** ![42fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/4/b487fb/32.png) [@42fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/42fish)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2005, 10:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-the-brownshirtedness-of-nyc-protesters-an-update-in-the-wake-of-the-rnc/299094/71 "2005-04-13T22:54:57Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > No, I have shown that both in raw numbers of arrests, and in convictions, those protesting against the Republicans are disproportionately overrepresented in going over the edge from legal protest to illegal disruptions. > > Which was pretty much my point all along. > > Regards, > Shodan Or you may have shown that police in NYC are more likely to arrest demonstrators over minor infractions than police in Boston. Clearly what we need is for the Dems to hold their 2008 convention in New York and the Republicans to hold theirs in Boston so we can compare and contrast. It may help if the Democrats nominate Hillary Clinton since she ticks off the right wing about as much as George W Bush does the left. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2005, 12:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-the-brownshirtedness-of-nyc-protesters-an-update-in-the-wake-of-the-rnc/299094/72 "2005-04-14T00:39:05Z")
> [@UncleBeer](#): > > Right, referring to a particular person. As I said, it detracts from your main thesis when you emphasize an individual over the general case. Particularly when done repeatedly. In what way does it detract from my point? You yourself conceded that the point had some validity. Does this change just because i happen to abuse **Shodan** after making the point? > [@UncleBeer](#): > > So your original claim that this **wasn’t** a pitting of Shodan was simply an error? Or worse? No, it wasn’t an error, nor was it a lie, if that’s what you’re implying. I was pitting the general attitude that his post exemplified, and i wanted people to focus on the broader point i was making about the use of evidence and about the behavior of law enforcement officals. The fact that pitting **Shodan** was not the specific reason for starting the thread should not preclude me from calling bullshit on his bullshit claims. > [@UncleBeer](#): > > This, along with attacking someone over something said months ago on which you couldn’t be bothered to comment contemporaneously, is what makes it petty. You are fucking moron. There, happy now? You have finally said something in this thread that really _is_ demonstrative of complete idiocy. When you say that i “couldn’t be bothered to comment contemporaneously,” you seem to imply that i looked at the thread, saw **Shodan** ’s comments, and decided not to get involved. The reality, though, is that i didn’t comment on that thread because i never saw it. Much as this might surprise, there are some political threads on this message board that escape my notice, either because i’m away from the Boards, or because i’m too busy participating in other threads. Also, you suggest that commenting months later is petty. But look, dickhead, the _New York Times_ article i cited only came out yesterday. So, while i could have questioned his generalizations back then—and done so quite justifiably—it was only yesterday that i saw the evidence that not only called into question his poor methodology, but provided refutation of his actual statistics. Do you see how this works? Let me spell it out for you in short sentences. 1. I never participated in that original thread. 2. The reason i didn’t participate is that i never saw it. 3. If i had seen it, i’m pretty sure i would have spoken up then. 4. I _did_ participate in _other_ threads where suggestions were made about the violent tendencies of liberals. I also remember seeing such claim in the news media, especially from conservative commentators. 5. I saw an article in the New York Times yesterday which noted the number of dismissals in these cases. 6. I thought that the NYT artcile provided some counter-evidence to the earlier assertions i had seen. 7. I searched for an appropriate comment to hang my argument on, and came up with **Shodan** ’s. > [@UncleBeer](#): > > The comments you’ve finally made would not have been appropriate for that thread anyway, so I don’t see what your participation, or lack of it there, has to do with anything. You get dumber with every passing minute. I specifically put this thread in the Pit because i wanted to use some invective about the situation. I could have started it in GD and made similar points without the invective. And, had i participated in the original thread, i could have made similar points well within GD rules. But i didn’t want to. I wanted it in the Pit. And let’s be clear on exactly how “petty” and abusive i was towards **Shodan**. Here are my points about him from the OP: > [@mhendo](#): > > But, of course, some of our conservative colleagues begged to differ, making much of small or isolated incidents in an attempt to paint all liberals or Democrats with the brush of violence and extralegal and illegal activity. Perhaps the plainest statement of this position came from Shodan in this thread. He provided us, in post #43, with some statistics, and posed a question. > > \ > > Well, some people did indeed attempt to discuss the issue, pointing out the problems of making a direct comparison, and also pointing out that a goodly proportion of the anti-DNC protesters in Boston were also, in fact, disaffected Democrats, liberals, and leftists. > > When Shodan was asked to clarify his question, he responded, in post #64, with the following: > > \ > > Well, even at the time the question was asked, it presented a rather simplistic and poorly thought out set of problems, and evidenced very little except a desire to be inflammatory. But that’s by the by. > > The problem with stories like this is that everyone reads them while they’re hot, and a lot of people never find out how everything turns out in the end. Well, in case anyone left the post-convention period in the belief that Shodan and his ilk had made a valid general point, i thought it worth pointing out that yesterday’s New York Times might throw some new light on the issue (alternative link to the same story, for those not registered with the Times). > > \ > > I’ve suggested above that Shodan blew a few incidents out of proportion in order to make a sweeping generalization. > > \ > > In case anyone be mistaken, this thread is not a pitting of Shodan. All he demonstrated by his remarks was a failure to make logical comparisons, and an inability to understand the difference between an arrest and a conviction. To tell you the truth, i can hardly see a thing there that wouldn’t pass muster in GD. Even the last sentence, while a little snarky, probably wouldn’t even earn a caution. About the only non-GD-appropriate stuff was my comments at the top about Bush and about “compassionate” conservatisim. Really, if this is all you’ve got, you’re pissing into the wind. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2005, 12:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-the-brownshirtedness-of-nyc-protesters-an-update-in-the-wake-of-the-rnc/299094/73 "2005-04-14T00:48:46Z")
**Shodan** , i’m interested in your summary dismissal of my points about statistics. Let me take one key point of your last post, and ask you something. I said: > [@mhendo](#): > > You fail to take into account the number of people convicted as a percentage of total protesters. and you said > [@Shodan](#): > > Irrelevant So, let’s take a hypothetical. Say we have two demonstrations, one consisting solely of liberals protesting against conservatives, and one consisting solely of conservatives protesting against liberals. Say the first demonstration (the liberals) contains 100,000 people, and the second demonstration (conservatives) contains 10,000 people. Say, also, that 2,000 liberals are arrested and convicted of breaking the law. And, at the other demonstration, 400 conservatives are arrested and convicted of breaking the law. So, 2% of the liberal demonstraters were arrested and convicted, as against 4% of the conservatives. Do you contend that we need ignore these percentages and focus only on the raw numbers of people arrested? ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2005, 1:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-the-brownshirtedness-of-nyc-protesters-an-update-in-the-wake-of-the-rnc/299094/74 "2005-04-14T01:13:11Z")
> [@matt\_mcl](#): > > LOL! Wouldn’t it have been fabulous if the Brownshirts actually _had_ used pies? "_Vaterlaaaaaaaaaaand!!_ _splut_ " Mussolini’s blackshirts used castor oil, as Cecil shows: [http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a4\_028.html](http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a4_028.html) ---
**Author:** ![manhattan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/manhattan/32/7_2.png) [@manhattan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/manhattan)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2005, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-the-brownshirtedness-of-nyc-protesters-an-update-in-the-wake-of-the-rnc/299094/75 "2005-04-14T01:16:36Z")
> [@mhendo](#): > > So, let’s take a hypothetical. I don’t really have a horse in this race, especially after having blown my attempt at humor, but I have to comment on this. If one accepts that the motivations to a) not protest, b) protest and not do anything arrest-worthy, and c) do something arrest-worthy (and by that I mean really arrest-worthy, not some of the BS that NYPD was apparently picking people up for) are different, than your example is not useful. I agree that **Shodan** has not shown a useful distinction or trend in his examples, but your hypothetical can also not show anything useful. ---
**Author:** ![Frostillicus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9bcb4/32.png) [@Frostillicus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frostillicus)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2005, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-the-brownshirtedness-of-nyc-protesters-an-update-in-the-wake-of-the-rnc/299094/76 "2005-04-14T03:45:13Z")
> [@Twin](#): > > I’m not sure what this whole thing proves. If 91% of the convictions were ended with not guilty, that still leaves 9% that weren’t. 9% of 1670 is around 150. That is still 30 times more than the 5 arrested at Boston. In addition, given the recent throwings of [pies](http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20041022-110747-8988r.htm) , [pies](http://www.indystar.com/articles/8/235034-8678-102.html) , and more [pies](http://www.indystar.com/articles/1/234061-9901-009.html) not to mention [salad dressing](http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/04/01/buchanan.attacked.ap/) at conservative speakers, I would say brownshirt tactics are alive and well on the left. Good point. I remember quite well how Hitler’s brownshirts took over the Reichstag in the Great Pie-throwing Contest of 1934. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2005, 4:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-the-brownshirtedness-of-nyc-protesters-an-update-in-the-wake-of-the-rnc/299094/77 "2005-04-14T04:03:11Z")
> [@manhattan](#): > > I don’t really have a horse in this race, especially after having blown my attempt at humor, but I have to comment on this. If one accepts that the motivations to a) not protest, b) protest and not do anything arrest-worthy, and c) do something arrest-worthy (and by that I mean really arrest-worthy, not some of the BS that NYPD was apparently picking people up for) are different, than your example is not useful. > > I agree that **Shodan** has not shown a useful distinction or trend in his examples, but your hypothetical can also not show anything useful. Why not? I mean, especially, in terms of whether or not we can draw conclusions (like **Shodan** has done) about certain groups’ propensity for illegal activity. Your distinction between (a) and (b) might show certain differences among people, but it does not, by itself, say anthing about a person’s propensity of commit illegal acts. Simple participation in protests such as this does no not constitute _prima facie_ evidence that a person is somehow less law-abiding than someone who chooses not to protest. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2005, 4:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-the-brownshirtedness-of-nyc-protesters-an-update-in-the-wake-of-the-rnc/299094/78 "2005-04-14T04:07:26Z")
I should add that i didn’t offer my hypothetical in the belief that it, by itself, would constitute some sort of evidence for my case. I offered it simply as a counter to the belief that raw numbers tell the whole story, absent any context of percentages, participants, conditions, etc., etc., etc. **Shodan** ’s the one who’s made the direct connection between the statistics and broader issues of liberal willingness to use illegal methods, but so far he really hasn’t shown why any extrapolation from these numbers might be valid. ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2005, 5:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-the-brownshirtedness-of-nyc-protesters-an-update-in-the-wake-of-the-rnc/299094/79 "2005-04-14T05:59:30Z")
All I know is I’d rather have someone throw pies at commentators than [people advocating violence against judges or murdering doctors doing their jobs.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=6045549&postcount=1) ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2005, 1:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-the-brownshirtedness-of-nyc-protesters-an-update-in-the-wake-of-the-rnc/299094/80 "2005-04-14T13:09:40Z")
Just to take one more whack at this dead horse: > [@mhendo](#): > > So, let’s take a hypothetical. Say we have two demonstrations, one consisting solely of liberals protesting against conservatives, and one consisting solely of conservatives protesting against liberals. You’re not even going to be able to get that. [A lot of those protesting in Boston seemed to have been liberals, too -](http://www.boston.com/news/politics/conventions/protesters/) the Kucinich campaign, Run Against Bush, A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition, etc. There don’t seem to be as many conservatives at the [RNC protests.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Republican_National_Convention_protest_activity) Again, the pattern seems to be that a mixture of liberals and conservatives protesting against Democrats produces very little provably criminal activity. A predominantly liberal batch protesting against Republicans produces much more. I’m sure you can make up some other scenarios where this is not the case, but in the real world… Regards, Shodan [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-the-brownshirtedness-of-nyc-protesters-an-update-in-the-wake-of-the-rnc/299094.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-the-brownshirtedness-of-nyc-protesters-an-update-in-the-wake-of-the-rnc/299094.md?page=5)