The return of Vichy?



That's almost as melodramatic as this French "boycott." This issue is much more complex than references to the Third Reich (or pro-Palestine, anti-Zionist T-shirts) allow.

Once again, back to the old conservative mantra, "Words mean things." In this case, thug, which means "a cruel or vicious ruffian, robber, or murderer" or "an aggressive and violent young criminal" and has an etymology stemming from a "member of a well-organized confederacy of professional assassins who traveled in gangs throughout India for several hundred years."

The shoppers in the supermarket certainly didn't appear frightened or even much disturbed by these boycotting "thugs." If some actual thugs invaded a store full of law-abiding shoppers, I think customers would be scattering and hiding. Didn't notice any of that here, in an action that I'd guess was all pre-approved, well coordinated, and inside the lines.

I think the word "hero" has also suffered a similar fate at the keyboarding hands of conservatives. If Friend-of-Ashbrook Glenn Beck or Bill O'Reilly hasn't the seen vid yet, pass it along, and maybe they can resuscitate the boycott of French products in America.

Do Matt and Craig favor this boycott and if so, why?

Here we go; here is more information. These websites are neatly done and use the jargon of the peace movement. Forget, ignore some things and it all makes sense.

"The shoppers in the supermarket certainly didn't appear frightened or even much disturbed by these boycotting "thugs"." That's what reminds me of Vichy.

So, the non-violent boycotters are the Nazis in your equation? Okay....

Nazi, no, but anti-Jewish and fascistic, yes.

To put it another way, it's only peaceful because no one has the temerity to object to the people who are removing things from store shelves.