I try not to even think back to the ill-fated G20 Summit from last summer as it gets my blood boiling.

During the past few nights, I’ve been watching “World At War” – a 30-hour DVD series produced by the BBC that details the very origins of World War II and then captures the entire six-year conflict from start to finish.

I wish that the criminals responsible for the riots at the G20 Summit had watched this 30-hour DVD series to understand how many people fought and died so that we could have freedom – a freedom that they’ve used to smash windows and burn cars for no reason other than boredom and the sense of entitlement that all of today’s youth possess…

I just don’t understand.

I really, truly do not understand, and I want to know “why” and “what for.”

Why the need for senseless violence and mayhem?

What do they think they’re going to accomplish and who do they think are listening?

The most incredible part about all this, is that I don’t think they understand either.

I don’t think they know why they’re doing what they’re doing; they just know that they’re doing it.

The protestors, or, to take a page out of David Miller’s book, we’ll just call them “criminals,” were destroying everything and anything in their path on Saturday afternoon as their “organized protest” turned into “pre-mediated chaos.”

But in my heart, I really, truly believe that these criminals, majority of them from the “Black Bloc,” have no idea why they’re rioting, causing mayhem, and destroying the windows of mom-and-pop stores when their agenda was supposed to serve otherwise.

I think they’re bored.

I think they’re sad.

I think they’re unhappy, unemployed, uneducated, and overlooked by society.

I think most, not all, of these criminals just want to “belong” to something as they represent the social outcasts and misfits who refuse to simply accept their place behind the deep fryer at McDonald’s.

I truly don’t think they know what “anarchy” is.  They just know they want it.

Anarchy is defined as:
1.  A state of society without government or law.
2.  Political and social disorder due to the absence of government control.
3.  A theory that regards the absence of all direct or coercive government as a political ideal and that proposes the cooperative and voluntary association of individuals and groups as the principal mode of organized society.

Those three definitions actually cast anarchy in slightly different lights, but they all have one thing in common: lack of government.

I’m going to continue referring to Saturday’s violent “protestors” and “anarchists” as “criminals,” because that’s what they are.  To call them anything else is akin to calling Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold “mis-guided youth” instead of “mass murderers.”  Protestors don’t carry pipe bombs, Molotov cocktails, and bags of nails and broken glass with explosive devices.

These criminals don’t believe in government, many of them believe in anarchy, and some believe in the former without believing in the latter.

But I’m of the mindset that without government, you will have anarchy.  And you won’t have the free-spirited, pot-smoking, love-making, happy-go-lucky anarchy that many of these criminals so desire.

The world’s political leaders met this weekend to try and collectively sort out the world’s woes as we stand on the edge of the economic abyss.

The world’s financial picture is blurry and whether we like it or not, all our fates are intertwined.  Countries are no longer self-sufficient we rely on trading partners to keep us moving.  As Stephen Harper said today, “There is no longer a Canadian economy; there is a world economy.”

The criminals would have us go without government, but what would result?

What would we experience via anarchy instead of capitalism and democracy?

Maybe a 700% increase in crime?

How about 60% of the world’s population being unemployed?

Picture a post-apocalyptic scene from any Hollywood movie: I Am Legend, The Book of Eli, The Postman…

Do the criminals actually believe that without government, we’ll all just live off our crops and surf all day?

Or maybe, just maybe, they don’t actually understand what they’re preaching.

Maybe, just maybe, the world’s political leaders, with their Harvard business degrees and their Oxford poly-sci educations, might actually know what’s better for the world than the Black Bloc.

I saw one clip on the news where a criminal was arrested for smashing a Starbucks window with a brick, and when asked what he was protesting, he said, “I’m against the New World Order.”

Really?  Please, elaborate.

What is this “new world order” that you speak of?

Do you simply mean “people that have money and nice things, that I’m jealous of,” or are you referring to Woodrow Wilson’s call for a League of Nations back in 1918?  Does the “new world order” represent anything substantive to you?  Or was it just the name of a wrestling tag-team in the W.W.E.?

I understand the right to protest, really, I do, and organized protests were an important part of this weekend.  But let’s not confuse protesting with criminal acts.

Oh, and while we’re at it, let’s try to understand “rights.”

Because in another news clip, a criminal was arrested for possessing a duffel-bag filled with pipes, nails, and explosive devices.  While being handcuffed, he submitted, “My rights are being violated.  This is an illegal search and seizure…”

Listen up buddy, you could have injured and killed dozens of people with bombs made of nails, ball-bearings, broken glass, and whatever else you could muster up.  I think some of your “rights” went out whichever window your fellow anarchists did not smash in with a baseball bat…

Lost in all this are two major ironies:

1.  Many of these criminals are crying afoul that the government spent $1 Billion on security for the G-20, yet they are out causing millions of dollars worth of damage, and necessitating the need for all that security in the first place.

2.  If they are against capitalism and big business, then I understand smashing the front window of a bank.  But why smash the front window of some mom-and-pop store?  Doesn’t that defeat the purpose?  Is it possible that maybe these anarchists and criminals don’t understand their own agenda and just play follow-the-leader?

If I could make one final point, I would like to publicly decry the actions of the police, riot squad, and other security, or rather, I’d like to publicly decry their inactivity on Saturday afternoon.

I understand their mandate: keep the protestors and criminals away from the G-20 Summit.

But to allow this?

I’m a tax-payer, and it’s some of my money that was used for the “security” this weekend.

I’m appalled by the lack of police force that was used to intervene and apprehend these criminals and bring them to justice.

And what about the store owners on Yonge Street who had their windows smashed and their wares looted?  They’re tax-payers!  They should be outraged!  Is the city going to pay for the damage, both compensatory and punitive?

It’s not like the police were outnumbered!

It’s not like the police had rocks and the criminals had guns!  I’m pretty sure it’s the other way around!

In those photos above – where are the police?  Where is the riot squad?  Where are the helmets, shields and batons?

These are criminals and they should be treated as such.

As soon as the first window was smashed, the riot squad should have been making arrests.

But they let it go on, for reasons that still remain unclear.

I’d love to hear an explanation from our esteemed Mayor Miller as he finishes prepares to finish his term this fall.

Well, those are my thoughts on the weekend that was.

I don’t pull my punches, and I’m not afraid of offending anybody.

I truly believe in everything that I wrote, and I hope I’m speaking up for those people that feel the same way but don’t want to voice their opinions.  And for those that don’t agree, I welcome and encourage your own thoughts.

Tomorrow, we’ll actually talk about real estate…

(CLICK HERE for the original blog post from 6/28/2010 and the 29 comments from readers)