Re: [Mpls] Antiwar resolutions

[Brobson34]

I think it is time for Jordan Kushner to consider not paying his city taxes. After all, if Jordan is *truly* committed to ensuring that there is no war, and the city councilpeople truly have a chance to do something about our war prospects, and refuse to do so, despite being our elected officials, then some sort of protest more meaningful than guilt-tripping people on a discussion list seems to be in order. Think of the publicity that would be generated if everyone locally opposed to the war suddenly decided to stop paying city taxes, and gathered together to state publicly why they were doing so. This would make people pay attention much more than our city council being the 80th or 90th so city to take a stand on the issue.
I'm guessing by Jordan's logic that those who would decide to continue paying their city taxes perhaps don't feel that ending the war is important enough. Perhaps they'd rather talk the talk than walk the walk. I mean, why draw the line at a city council resolution to castigate those for their "false" anti-war views, their comfortably convenient rhetoric?
There are litmus tests and there are litmus tests. One of the most shocking and effective means of protesting the Vietnam War occurred when people (most of them Vietnamese) started immolating themselves. How much "inconvenience" can one stand? Is there any place to draw the line? If so, where?

Britt Robson
Lyndale
a sincere or insincere anti-war guy, depending on your own line