The trouble that several people seem to have with the white collar criminals as targets of political campaigns mainly arise from the diffuse meaning the attribute to the the word 'criminal'. This term, like all many others, might be undone of its political connotations in public opinion, but activists should be able to distinguish he underlying notions.
Most importantly, breaking the law does not make anything criminal. Its all about the reasons why laws are broken. A criminal is someone exploiting a prohibition situation for the enormous profits it entails by breaking the law in quite a capitalist sense: for the individual profit, in money but also in any other advantage gained on an individual level, but does not challenge the social order us at all. In fact, criminals love the social order , especially if their lawbreaking enhances their individual position in it.
Others, in this case insurgents like the squatters, break the law independent from the personal benefits that they would get from such an act, mostly by ignoring the law on their way to achieving a social balance modeled on principles beyond the legality in the current social order. No prohibition is exploited and they would do the exact same things if it was legal, as long as they are in line with their political goals.
Such outlaws (not criminals) operate beyond legality and it is their moral motives they might form the base for future rules in a different society if ever achieved (by legal or illegal means).
The white collar bit in the media work here is in fact nothing more than the unmasking of the class inequalities is the current criminal (in)justice system. While 'blue collar criminals' (like shoplifters and other subsistence lawbreakers) get the full load, the upper class gets not only left alone, but even supported by the state in order to defend their class privilege. The are 'illegal capitalists' no better than the legal ones, but ensured of legal protection against those challenging the social order.
Depicting house owners as criminals eventually replaces the moral authority attributed to statuary law, by the one of the moral goals of the activists. This works especially well, if these principles are shared by the public opinion, and is a powerful means of pressure to force the hand of elected officials, that then again command the police. It also ultimately undermines the legitimacy of the state (for the fetishist who care ;)
criminals and outlaws
The trouble that several people seem to have with the white collar criminals as targets of political campaigns mainly arise from the diffuse meaning the attribute to the the word 'criminal'. This term, like all many others, might be undone of its political connotations in public opinion, but activists should be able to distinguish he underlying notions.
Most importantly, breaking the law does not make anything criminal. Its all about the reasons why laws are broken. A criminal is someone exploiting a prohibition situation for the enormous profits it entails by breaking the law in quite a capitalist sense: for the individual profit, in money but also in any other advantage gained on an individual level, but does not challenge the social order us at all. In fact, criminals love the social order , especially if their lawbreaking enhances their individual position in it.
Others, in this case insurgents like the squatters, break the law independent from the personal benefits that they would get from such an act, mostly by ignoring the law on their way to achieving a social balance modeled on principles beyond the legality in the current social order. No prohibition is exploited and they would do the exact same things if it was legal, as long as they are in line with their political goals.
Such outlaws (not criminals) operate beyond legality and it is their moral motives they might form the base for future rules in a different society if ever achieved (by legal or illegal means).
The white collar bit in the media work here is in fact nothing more than the unmasking of the class inequalities is the current criminal (in)justice system. While 'blue collar criminals' (like shoplifters and other subsistence lawbreakers) get the full load, the upper class gets not only left alone, but even supported by the state in order to defend their class privilege. The are 'illegal capitalists' no better than the legal ones, but ensured of legal protection against those challenging the social order.
Depicting house owners as criminals eventually replaces the moral authority attributed to statuary law, by the one of the moral goals of the activists. This works especially well, if these principles are shared by the public opinion, and is a powerful means of pressure to force the hand of elected officials, that then again command the police. It also ultimately undermines the legitimacy of the state (for the fetishist who care ;)