Slashdot Mirror


The Future of Protest In Panopticon Nation

Hugh Pickens writes "James Fallows writes that you don't have to idealize everything about the Occupy movement to recognize the stoic resolve of the protesters at UC Davis being pepper sprayed as a moral drama that the protesters clearly won. 'The self-control they show, while being assaulted, reminds me of grainy TV footage I saw as a kid, of black civil rights protesters being fire-hosed by Bull Connor's policemen in Alabama. Or of course the Tank Man in Tiananmen Square,' writes Fallows. 'Such images can have tremendous, lasting power.' We can't yet imagine all the effects of the panopticon society we are beginning to live in but one benefit to the modern protest movement is the omnipresence of cameras (video) as police officials, protesters, and nearly all onlookers are recording whatever goes on bringing greater accountability and a reality-test for police claims that they 'had' to use excessive force. 'What's new is that now the perception war occurs simultaneously with the physical struggle. There's almost parity,' writes Andrew Sprung. 'You have a truncheon or gun, I have a camera. You inflict pain, I inflict infamy.'"

16 of 566 comments (clear)

  1. This guy ever been beaten up before? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    First Post

    "There's almost parity,' writes Andrew Sprung. 'You have a truncheon or gun, I have a camera. You inflict pain, I inflict infamy.'""

    haha come on, parity?

    Has this guy ever been pepper sprayed or beaten up before?

    People shouldnt have to endure this to receive justice

    Its a sad day our society thinks this is some kind of achievement or "balance" of power

    1. Re:This guy ever been beaten up before? by causality · · Score: 5, Insightful

      People shouldnt have to endure this to receive justice

      No, they shouldn't, but this is the way it has always been.

      You can read the autobiography of Mohandas Ghandi (a really wonderful book) and see the same patterns. You can read some Henry David Thoreau and understand why he would have preferred to remain in jail instead of having a well-meaning but less-principled individual pay his poll tax for him.

      As long as the masses, the majority of people, are largely passive and indifferent to the injustice around them there will always be a need for exceptional individuals to take this kind of abuse to effect any real change. What people like Thoreau and Ghandi realized was the error of violence, the way it makes it so easy for those who control perception and use propaganda to make the violent (however justified) into evil bogeymen who will always be demonized in the popular mind.

      I heard this one time and I never forgot it. It is a saying of Ghandi's: "the good that violence appears to do is temporary; the harm that it does is permanent." I suppose there are a lot of low-brow, smarmy types with nothing to contribute so for them maybe I should add "within the context of protest and trying to change society" so the fact that war sometimes is quite necessary is irrelevant. There was a time before it became necessary and that's when peaceful change was possible. I'm tired of that small-minded crowd, so I don't consider it a total waste to deny them the slam-dunk "victory" they so desperately crave.

      At any rate, doing it peacefully means you absolutely must maintain the high ground. If you want to expose the establishment for the bunch of power-hungry thugs they tend to be, you cannot use their tactics. It provides no contrast. The unwise, reactionary, direction-less types who tend to attach themselves to any major movement are the biggest problem the Occupiers currently have. Do you not notice how the media reports with glee the rapes, murders, etc. that occur on the Occupied territory? That's exactly what they want -- for you to be no better. If you want to be effective, don't give it to them.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    2. Re:This guy ever been beaten up before? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      History always repeats itself. Swords and pens have become guns and cameras. The balance between them remains the same.

    3. Re:This guy ever been beaten up before? by causality · · Score: 5, Insightful

      First Post

      "There's almost parity,' writes Andrew Sprung. 'You have a truncheon or gun, I have a camera. You inflict pain, I inflict infamy.'""

      haha come on, parity?

      Has this guy ever been pepper sprayed or beaten up before?

      People shouldnt have to endure this to receive justice

      Its a sad day our society thinks this is some kind of achievement or "balance" of power

      The balance of power has always been a slow, grinding play of justice against violent acts.

      You rob a convenience store, or ten, it profits you in the moment, but spending years behind bars is the price. If a cop beats a protester to death for no apparent reason and it is covered by several independent video cameras, he's a lot more likely to answer for his actions than if it was merely witnessed by 50 protesters who were also being beaten.

      Unfortunately the worst penalty the cop is likely to face is either a paid vacation known as "administrative leave" or maybe the loss of his job. This is a serious problem. A free society won't stay that way if the police have some kind of special status above the citizens they are supposed to be serving. Incidentally, a cop who beats someone basically has to also charge them with resisting arrest (or similar) or he's admitting he beat them for no reason, so there is both the assault and the criminal charge that may haunt the person for life.

      Even the idea that "assaulting a police officer" carries a higher penalty than assaulting a citizen might sound good but it's completely misguided. The cop is better able to respond to an assault, to have back-up, and carries an assortment of weaponry everywhere he goes. The average citizen is more likely to be unarmed and more likely to hesitate to use any available weapons for fear that a court will not consider it self-defense (we like victimhood and we like to encourage bullies so in many states you are expected to try fleeing first, nevermind this only emboldens the criminals). Even if there were not such an inequality, the cop is our servant, one particularly able to abuse his authority, and granting him equality alone is generous.

      You simply can't have "special" or "protected" groups and expect to remain an egalitarian society that cherishes freedoms. It has never happened before and it won't happen again.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    4. Re:This guy ever been beaten up before? by Anonymous+Psychopath · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sorry to ask you, but what exactly Ghandy achieved? I am not saying that he is not extraordinary man, but, did he actually change anything at all???

      Other than India's change from a British colony to a sovereign nation, you mean? Are you serious?

      --

      Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.

    5. Re:This guy ever been beaten up before? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The problem is that unions make it very difficult to fire people that really deserve firing.

      It was not unions that ordered the police to use force at the level that they did. And it should not be the officers, even the infamous Lt John Pike from UCDavis who will forever be known as the fat turd who strolled in front of peaceful protestors on their knees and casually sprayed them point-blank in the face with military-grade mace (and whose email address and personal information has been disseminated everywhere).

      Some of the photographic mashups of that famous photo are terrific, by the way.

      The people who ordered such over-the-top violence, the mayors and chancellors (I love that word, "chancellors") who thought they were being clever by coordinating their actions to neutralize the protests, those are the folks that should pay the price.

      But nice try, ShakaUVM, you sad fuck, to make this all a "union" issue or a "marxist" issue, instead of what it is, an issue of the overt militarization of municipal police forces. And an issue of an increasingly antsy elite who are starting to sweat in the cracks in their asses because there are just so many people who aren't rich out there who are starting to get pissed about being misused.

      I mean, when exactly did campus police start dressing like extras from an S&M production of The Empire Strikes Back, anyway? The funny thing about when you bring all that para-military drag and hardware into a small force, there are always a few who are just dying to get a chance to use it. And that sad, chubby little thug with the mustache who thought it was just so cool to show those oh-so-superior college students a thing or two about what it means to carry a badge, that little shit who probably never got the time of day from any of the hot coeds he tried to chat up on campus, who saw all those smart-ass college kids who thought they were better than him because they were going to get Masters Degree instead of his associates in criminal justice from a community college. Oh, Lt John Pike was going to show them what's what alright. And ShakaUVM who I'm sure identifies with Lt Pike shakes his fist and says, "Yeah, give it to them hippie bitches".

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
  2. Unfortunately the reverse is also true... by infolation · · Score: 5, Insightful

    With the proliferation of video and photographic 'evidence', people seem much more ready to believe an event didn't happen nowadays if there isn't visual 'smoking gun' evidence to prove it.

  3. agents provocateurs by khasim · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Look for more incidents involving agents provocateurs in future protests. It's easier to "justify" whatever actions are taken if they can show footage of a "protester" acting in an "unreasonable" fashion.

    The public footage is having a huge impact right now because people are seeing people like themselves at the protests and NOT causing problems ... and hearing the official reports contradicting the footage.

  4. Re:Tiananmen Square not a good example by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 5, Insightful

    oh, you are so wrong!

    one very real thing that got accomplished: the world is seeing a new side of america.

    for the last 10+ yrs, america was the brunt of jokes and the poster child for anti-freedom in major world powers. we invaded, we killed, we were mercenaries for oil and big business. to be called 'an american' by someone overseas was getting to be an insult.

    things have now changed. or, are in change.

    overseas, I sense people are cheering us on. they see that its our LEADERS that are fucking us over. americans are not evil to the core (like many seem to want to believe and label us) but we, like so many other countries, have lost the war of control over our own government. but we are at least trying to get it back.

    the world is starting to give us a little tiny bit of credit for that. and they are showing support in their OWN occupy protests! that's proof, right there.

    we are [re]spreading freedom. from the bottom-up. and 'they' see that. it won't do a damned thing now; but we are planting seeds. the kids today who see this MAY think twice when its their turn to run things.

    I expect zero things to change in my lifetime. I'm old. but I'm somewhat hopeful about the future (for you guys) given this refreshing new spirit I'm seeing.

    --

    --
    "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
  5. Re:They are brave, but there's a difference by Zaphod+The+42nd · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The problem is that very clearly neither the Republican party nor the Democratic party will face these issues. They're both part of the same partisan shell-game that instills apathy and just gets more and more corrupt. Voting for either party is just a distraction, instead what is happening right now is an absolute no-confidence in government, and we need to ditch BOTH of the existing parties. Down with the two party system.

    --
    GCS/MU/P d- s:- a-- C++++$ UL++ P+ L++ E+ W++ N o K- w--- O M+ V- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP t+ 5- X R++ tv+ b++ DI++ D++ G+ e++ h-
  6. Re:Moral equivalence not withstanding by Professr3 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you consider pepper spray to be "weaksauce", there are a few people who were still coughing up blood 45 minutes afterward who'd like to have a word with you. There are a few marines who might want to tell you about their war veteran friend who was shot in the head and almost killed, while the police tossed concussion grenades at the people trying to get him to medical care. The fact that the methods used "aren't as bad as X" doesn't make them any less heinous.

  7. Re:The legitimate projection of force. by Genda · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Even from "State Authority" we demand that violence be tempered and that force be fair and proportional to the threat. When a Bull Conner unleashes attack dogs on people quietly walking or a National Guardman shoots an unarmed girl with a high powered rifle standing in protest on a campus lawn or Police assault people up to and including deadly force for no apparent cause, we are rightly dumbstruck and appalled. Because they have the charge of using force, they must be all the more responsible for using it as the last possible way of managing a circumstance, and at that in strict measure according to the threat.

    Mayor Bloomberg had terrible force unleashed on the Occupy protestors. He knew this is his last term and he would have to return to Wallstreet after his term was over, so we can all clearly see whose interest he protected and protected savagely. This is exactly the kind of misuse of power, that makes good Americans want to take their government back from from death grip of the 1%. Sadly some are willing to use violence, and sad as that may be, it too is something that is sometimes justifiable.

  8. Re:The legitimate projection of force. by Genda · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You have to put this into context... Students around the country are being priced out of an education, while banks are getting filthy rich enslaving entire generations of young people with crushing debt attempting to chase the American Dream. All this happening while School Chancellors are retiring on multimillion dollar pensions and salaries that are growing astronomically every year. When such a vanishingly few seem to grow wealthy on the backs of those they should be serving how can you honestly say students shouldn't exercise their fair and legal right to protest publicly.

    Simply blasting children with pepper spray not only did not solve the problem, but the video of the event so inflamed public opinion that all involved will either lose their jobs or face criminal prosecution. The use of force in this circumstance is completely unwarranted, and people will do hard time for using it. By your logic, we could start macing j-walkers and parking violators. I'm certain you'd only need to be maced once to forever find committing that crime unpalatable. How about children being unruly in the classroom, forget the Ritalin, let's just mace the little buggers, that'll make them behave. Have you ever been pepper sprayed? Do you actually think that is an appropriate response to people quietly sitting down?

  9. Re:They are brave, but there's a difference by fishbowl · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Even that incident is totally different from the UC Davis one. Main point: Those particular individuals were in a place where they had a specific right to be because it was their domicile. Orders to vacate could not be lawfully given in the first place, at least not without specific and valid reasons (they were not trespassing, they were not blocking ingress or egress, or creating any other specific hazard.) They weren't under arrest, and there wasn't a warrant for their arrest or even a judicial process through which their arrest was sought. If the police had authority to make arrests, they could have done so with the handcuffs and 45ACPs. It is exactly _because_ they didn't have this authority that got Pike upset enough to cease being a law enforcement officer and become a vigilante, disobeying orders, ignoring California law and the policies and procedures of his department, and take out his aggressions against these individuals. He treated them as though they were the same people as some group of Oakland rioters or whatever. When the lawsuits inevitably come, the university is going to have to settle them quietly because there are serious risks they face if they have to admit either that they lied about not giving orders to use force, or if they have to admit that Pike disobeyed orders. Either way, ugly.

    --
    -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
  10. Re:The legitimate projection of force. by EdIII · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sadly some are willing to use violence, and sad as that may be, it too is something that is sometimes justifiable

    Justifiable violence is my fear. Passive resistance, civil disobedience, and jury nullification are all wonderful examples of making your point without violence and exposing the tyranny and rationale of those in power.

    However, I can fully admit that if it came down to it, I would kill another human being without a seconds thought if it was required to protect me, my friends, or my family. If rational discourse is not possible, and the environment so extreme that conflict resolution requires deadly force, I am going to survive.

    I do truly admire those that have the courage to be passive and forgiving even while dying painful deaths at the hands of others. I just don't have it.

    Sadly, I think we are heading towards justifiable violence as the only means to take back control of our countries and our lives. Protests and legislative bodies are accomplishing next to nothing and the situation is getting so bad, that my only choice will ultimately be violence or incarceration.

    As for leaving the US, just where would I go? Every country seems to be getting progressively worse and worse for their citizens, or is in economic slavery to the 1st world super powers.

  11. Re:The legitimate projection of force. by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Pepperspray is not the minimal level of force. The minimal level of force would have been to pick the protesters up and move them arrest them whatever. The use of pepper spray was to instil fear into the protesters.

    Isn't there a term for the act of using violence to instill fear in a group of people?

    --
    Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear