Yes, be proud of being unwilling to read views which contradict your own. Learning why other people disagree with you is something only fools do.
Here is the problem Nate. OWS has failed in defining themselves explicitly. This causes the effort of others to define them. When those definitions are offensive, more outsiders (i.e. The Krug) expend effort in defense of the movement, and that is met with a never ending flow of people and groups attempting to quantify the goals/demands/grievances of the OWS protesters as a group. So far, they defy any definition beyond popular opinion. Popular opinion is cruel to the ambiguous. So here we are.
To present an opinion by Krugman is the same as an opinion by Beck or Vice President Biden, or Gandhi. It is meaningless if the group itself can not present a reasonable definition of their purpose.
Beyond that, as you stated before, history is not kind to people who ignore displays of civil disobedience, and without reasonable demands or goals to be met, there is no direction for this movement to go except violence. That is the fear, and that is what we are headed for. I cannot see an avenue for escape in this scenario. This is not a group/movement that will simply wake up one morning and decide to go home. For the professional agitators/protesters/and minority political parties, this is their best hope for recognition. As the MSNBC commentator (I forget his name) said, "They need a Kent State moment." Unfortunately, I believe they will push until they get it.
