Civil disobedience at the DNC

Far be it from me to discourgae some good old fashioned civil disobedience but would it be too much to ask that the self-proclaimed anarchists and their leaders get their story straight before talking to the local press?

In Denver this weekend, a group of anarchists who have pledged to disrupt the Democratic National Convention will hold a secret action camp to learn about medical training and legal rights and to practice nonviolent tactics.

"We don't want history to remember the Democratic National Convention in Denver as something that went smoothly," said Tim Simons with the self-described anarchist group, Unconventional Denver.

"We want people to know there was dissent and people spoke up," he said...

The group says it will engage in nonviolent direct action and has called for protesters "to engage in a broad variety of tactics to disrupt fundraising events and prevent Democratic delegates from putting on the spectacle they claim as democracy," according to the group's website.

Unconventional Denver wants to shut down, disrupt or delay the convention; storm events; and "ensure that the DNC is a thing of rowdy beauty."

The website suggests activists "hold" intersections to strand delegates in buses and "swarm" streets to force police to retreat.

So do you want to protest in a non-violent manner or do you want to stir up a spectacle of "rowdy beauty"? In my mind the two are mutually independent.

You can't claim to be pursuing non-violent action on one hand and then turn around and advocate for actions that are designed specifically to antagonize and provoke law enforcement.