|
|
|
|
David Brown is a language consultant and journalist, regularly covering stories in Africa, Asia & the Middle East. He has lived in Finland for 10 years. |
A friend of mine seems to be becoming a terrorist. OK, he’s not exactly Al-Qaeda, but he is starting to talk about setting fire to banks.
He is furious about the role of banks in the global economic meltdown, and feels they need to be held accountable. I totally agree with him on this, and anyone who has read the details of the debt swap deal done between Goldman Sachs and the Greek Government some years back will be as well. Both parties set out to cheat the EU, the financial markets and the Greek people, and both should face serious consequences.
He is furious about the role of banks in the global economic meltdown, and feels they need to be held accountable. I totally agree with him on this, and anyone who has read the details of the debt swap deal done between Goldman Sachs and the Greek Government some years back will be as well. Both parties set out to cheat the EU, the financial markets and the Greek people, and both should face serious consequences.
But my anger does not extend to torching the nearest bank branch. For one thing, I do not think that all banks cheat and lie. Most may pay too much in salaries and bonuses, and some should consider making their bonus systems more transparent. As a customer I do have choices, and I’m quite comfortable with the bank I deal with. If I hear scandals concerning their incentive programs in future, I’ll have no hesitation in ditching them.
|
Ultimately, I don’t think targeting banks with violence works. It may even make matters worse, as they seek to recoup costs through higher fee structures, and become even more covert in the way they do business. Tainting all protests with the stain of violence plays right into the hands of the extremists within the banks – ‘See, these protestors are just mindless thugs!’
Like all battles, this one is ultimately fought for hearts and minds, in which case a far better response is a well-articulated position. A protest group called The Yes Men provided a wonderful example of how to incite change when they staged a news conference in which they pretended to be from the US Chamber of Commerce, admitting that the organisation had been wrong to deny climate change science, and would now lobby the government to adopt environmentally sustainable policies. The fall-out so embarassed the department that they did, in time, do just that. Humiliation, it seems, may be a more effective weapon than the baseball bat.
There is a time and a place for violent protest and resistance. But that time, to my mind, is limited to the appearance not of a George Bush, a Timo Soini or even a Björn Wahlroos, but of a genuine Adolf Hitler or Josef Stalin; someone who will not hesitate to use violence against orindary people.
The main reason to oppose violent protest is because it does not work. Banks will not stop paying absurd bonuses to themselves because someone smashes up one of their branches. And oil companies will not desist from raping the Nigerian delta because someone throws paint at their CEO. Ultimately things change because it simply makes sense to do so.
Shareholders and consumers also believe in a world of fair salaries, sound environmental policies and respect for human rights. As consumers, we have a role in reminding them of that; but armed more often with a carrot than a stick.
