While I won't disagree that this is all really depressing, it's really more the status quo than a deviation. It's just in the age of modern handheld videocams and such that there's a lot more evidence. That, and these things are happening in an urban setting make them more accessible to the general public, or at least greater numbers of witnesses.

During the '90s, when I was involved with the Cove/Mallard and Otter/Wing Earth First! campaigns, toward the end, the US Forest Service was bringing FS police that we called 'Super Freddies' that had sub-machine guns and full body armor to extract protestors who were sitting in trees, and had built various stands and such to obstruct road-building in these pristine areas. The same violence was used, or worse. But it happened in the backwoods of Idaho (quite literally) and most people never saw nor heard of it.

The only saving grace was that those Super Freddies were lousy in the woods. Wrong tool, wrong time. I still marvel that no one was shot.

And yes, the protestors were non-violent. Extremely so, or they'd be dead.

Joan,

Please quit, immediately.

You do not get it.

Fundamentally.

We are living in a country that bloodlessly, for us, killed 1M people over the past 5 years.

We are living in a country that is in deep denial about global warming, and the DEATHS that this will inflict on millions as millions are forced to migrate for drinking water.

We are living in a country that is in deep denial of the fact that we have adopted torture and constant surveillance as standard policy -- every American is photographed over 200 times a day.

This is not some stupid foolishness over gender politics.

This is survival of the planet -- and you CAN'T get it, or choose not to.

It is the reason that campaign finance reform withers on the vine -- elites know that without the money to donate/bribe, people like AIPAC would get what Americans want. And that's not what AIPAC wants.

Rs, and more recently Ds, have come to terms with the fact that when it comes to direct policy, Americans really don't know stuff. But when it comes to the national character, and people's natural preferences, the only way to keep subverting it is to have a money machine that will feed liars the dough that they need to keep going, against the people's most basic wishes.

Sarah,

Fear not regarding Nicola's impending blissful marriage. People that announce that they meditate rarely do. And guys that dress in '40s costumes aren't a whole lot different than guys that dress in Batman suits.

Or wear makeup like the Joker's. Really.

As the previous letter writer clearly demonstrated, the problem with the new brand of conservative is really a deeply pathological one. The DSM IV calls it "dissocial personality disorder" and it has well defined characteristics.

From Wikipedia via the WHO:

1. Callous unconcern for the feelings of others and lack of the capacity for empathy.

2. Gross and persistent attitude of irresponsibility and disregard for social norms, rules, and obligations.

3. Incapacity to maintain enduring relationships.

4. Very low tolerance to frustration and a low threshold for discharge of aggression, including violence.

5. Incapacity to experience guilt and to profit from experience, particularly punishment.

6. Marked proneness to blame others or to offer plausible rationalizations for the behavior bringing the subject into conflict.

7. Persistent irritability.

The problem is that we've had a country run by these idiots, and it's given the ones who were just lurking in the background the anonymous temerity to act like it's normal.

It's not. I just got done listening to a piece on NPR that made the point that compassion didn't show up in religion until around 500 BC, and until it did, no major city lasted through it. Compassion and empathy are necessary things for societal persistence. It's not just a nicety for folks at Lake Woebegon.

It's too bad we can't get around to calling a kook a kook, or at least appropriately pitying them, and offering them the mental health care they need. But Ronald Reagan got rid of non-criminal health care in 1982 for a reason. He realized that of the percentage of people released, the sociopaths that would be out on the streets supporting him and all his friends.

Heaven help us all.

Corporate life sucks, but it definitely sucks worse for women than men. Men don't lose their jobs for having babies-- but I see this happen to woman after woman. Granted, it usually happens because of the flawed paternal leave policies we have, where women with a newborn are forced with an inexcusable choice, but it is clearly a sign that we have developed a system where humans are truly cogs in a machine -- not people.

I honestly haven't seen as much discrimination once women get past that critical point. Moving into higher-level admin is tough on both men and women, and the jobs usually go to those that follow whatever cultural incentives exist-- not necessarily the best, brightest or most productive.