In this reaction to the Occupy Movement, what is the writer’s contention and supporting arguments?Is the writer going for or against? And what tone is used? Protesters speak for us HUNDREDS of...
In this reaction to the Occupy Movement, what is the writer’s contention and supporting arguments?
Is the writer going for or against? And what tone is used?
Protesters speak for us
HUNDREDS of thousands of protesters can camp for weeks on end in a city like New York, yet a hundred or so protesters camp in Melbourne's City Square and lord mayor Robert Doyle calls in the riot squad and security within a week. They may only be a few hundred in number but they have the support of hundreds of thousands of us who can't be there, and they speak for anybody who is concerned about the influence of corporations on government policy. Think mining tax, pokies, green wedge development and the power of Crown Casino, to name a few.
Mina Hilson, West Footscray
The writer's contention is that the protestors that had assembled in Melbourne were few in number compared to the Occupy group that camped out in New York City yet the mayor Robert Doyle reacted to them as though they were a great danger and called in the riot police.
Her argument in favor of the protestors is that they are acting as representatives for all the people that oppose government policy but cannot camp out there because they are too busy working or taking care of families.
Because they speak for this larger group, and don't represent any real threat, they ought to be allowed to stay there to lodge their protests and act as a voice against all these powerful groups that can be present.