sides?

[Mike Weaver]

Rob advises:
>they need to think very carefully about the way their
>cause is portrayed. Whether the public face of the lobby (i.e. the
>violent brick throwers) [...]

The violent brick throwers are in the focus of public attention for how 
long? while day in day out the rest of the year the activists of the 
movement are working on getting people's attention and influence. Rob, I'd 
suggest the modern equivalent of tubal detox might be in order.

>I think these are steps in the
>right direction and need to be acknowledged as such.

Taking a couple of steps sideways to avoid a big puddle ain't in the right 
direction.

>it's better than nothing, which is what has
>been offered as an alternative.

Yes it is better than nothing but nothing is not the alternative being 
offered. Alternative meanings here however:

You could mean that the G8 leaders are the only ones with the decision 
making power so nothing anyone else is suggesting is worth a sou, or you 
could be back to your nihilist brick throwers.

Assuming the first - personally I'm glad that some concessions have been 
made, for the people around now to benefit from it. That doesn't mean I've 
any more respect for the G8 leaders. Extremes of wealth is structurally 
integral to the system they preside over. Extreme poverty mean early death 
for multitudes. There are alternatives being touted, but they mean, at the 
least, hitching the hell horses of capitalism to some basic system of human 
'rights'. While the priorities of our economies remain private profit and 
war any concession to the needs of the weakest is, beyond the short 
term,  little more than a valium laced sop for the caring masses to keep 
them petitioning and not revolting. Those leaders aren't going to do 
anything which threatens their paymasters' domnation of the global economy 
are they?

If you really think they are making steps in the right direction then I'd 
like to see you propose some viable next steps which the G8 leaders would 
be willing to make which would guarantee the necessary reduction in extremes.

BTW as far as the UK Welfare State goes, Blair has carried on restricting 
its reach and farming out as much as is politically expedient to private 
companies. The process is continuing...