MDG: 2) They lose the support of mainstream society, and rightfully so.
Qx: Maybe you can explain this one a little better. Has it occurred to you that the instances of violence actually serve as a diversion from the other protests going under way against the WTO? If mainstream society (US society that sees the boss as buddy) doesn't support the anti-WTO protests then they're goddamn fools. It's going to affect everybody in a bad way. It ranges from farming, worker's rights and much, much more. The world doesn't have time for US mainstream society to support anti-WTO protests. If Americans (especially pseudo-conservative pro-capitalists) want to think that's all much ado about nothing then they will learn their lesson. It's that simple.
MDG: I know the damned WTO is a weapon, but a meeting of WTO reps, all sitting in a room and talking, does not have the immediate violence of police beating union organizers, or protesters breaking McDonald's windows, and like it or not, people react to immediate violence first, and only consider the indirect violence of sedate corporate meetings in the absence of anything more fiery.
Qx: And that's the problem. If guys the likes of Frenchy, Joel Jacobson, Stuart Gort had much capacity for critical thinking in regards to capitalism then delusional pro-capitalist rants would have much less of an impact on maintream American society. Keep in mind that there's another problem to the violence that the WTO is about to render legal globally. It's long-term class warfare by the rich against the poor and the resident pro-capitalists here will just love it for the sake of personal ego stroking. That's how people react to long-term violence. Thay rationalize the indirect violence of sedate corporate meetings in the absence of anything more fiery.