Anti-Seditive

Sedition, as defined by Dictionary.com is inciting discontent or rebellion against government. What’s the line between sedition and protest, then? Clearly the framers intended with the Bill of Rights to ensure that government must not constrain basis, “inalienable” rights, which vested in the people the right to engage in debate and compromise to allow an orderly, functional society in which people could pursue their happiness. Ahh…

Watched “V for Vendetta”. I definitely got the “A for Agenda” in the film, and also got the intent to provoke thought, and doing so by basically telling what amounted to a true story, fictitiously modernized.

Remember, remember the Fifth of November… It’s a story about a guy (literally, his name was Guy Fawkes, and his story is actually connected to how we got the word “guy” in English) who tried to kill the king and blow up Parliament in 1605, exactly 401 years ago. Caught with matches in his pocket near 1800 pounds of gunpowder (enough to level parliament and blow out windows in a 1k radius). Brought to the king’s chamber, and by Executive Order was tortured for relevant torture, confessed, and was then executed. His conspirators were waiting in the countryside to insight riots and foment revolution. Had they been successful, there probly would have been massive retaliation against Catholics (the King was protestant, Fawkes, Catholic) and a protestant absolute monarch would have been installed and Britain’s history would have been recharted. Gotta love Wikipedia.

Anyway, what struck me about the story was a) the parallels between massive discontent about the president, b) the parallels between executive orders for torture, and c) the whole monarch thing…

Anyway, got thoughts about that? Is protest = sedition? Where’s the line?