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.'"
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
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.
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.
The blacks and Tank Man couldn't be sure the government wouldn't kill them on purpose. They faced down the very real threat of death for participating in their movements.
For the OWS movement, any deaths caused by the government will be accidental.
Blog explaining the protest:
http://studentactivism.net/2011/11/20/ten-things-you-should-know-about-fridays-uc-davis-police-violence/
Sig? Heil
because the cop used weak sauce pepper spray and casually doused them
Cops shouldn't be "casually dousing" any group of students assembled in a park, no matter how "weak sauce" the pepper spray is. Perhaps the resulting video was a little melodramatic, but the fact that you think it is okay for police to pepper spray citizens in a park shows you for the fascist that you really are. I hope you enjoy your anonymity, you pig.
-- Let us endeavor so to live that when we pass even the undertaker shall be sorry. -- M. Twain
From the summary:
"'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.'"
No, what you inflict is spin - because all you have to is show a carefully focused video showing the police swinging their truncheons or spraying pepper spray, and those who believe video bites represent the entire truth will defend your interpretation, and forward it, and 'like' it, etc... You'll hang 'em in the court of public opinion, but that's much more important than reality.
The point of the "agent provocateur" is that he works WITH the authorities while POSING as one of the protesters.
So when the calm protesters are engaged in non-violent protests, the agent provocateur becomes violent. That "violence" is used to "justify" the violence against the non-violent protesters.
And it is that one "violent protester" who is shown in the media as an example of how "unreasonable" the protesters (as a group) are.
My father was a college student and newspaper photographer in Ohio circa May 1970. His photos of student protest and civil disobedience remind me of what I'm seeing with the Occupy movement.
A year or more ago, I commented that I didn't think the Tea Party would have a long-term affect because they weren't motivated enough to burn down an ROTC building nor were the police scared enough of them to hit them with tear gas.
Agree with them or not. Understand them or not. The Occupy movement is going to leave a mark upon this country because they are willing to have skin in the game.
Cheers, Matt
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."
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.
Exactly.
The general populace understands that the State is the only entity that has a legitimate right to project force. Whether via the military (hopefully outside the country) or the police (inside the country). I include the CIA / FBI / etc in those categories.
Anyone else using force (particularly outside their social group) is IMMEDIATELY identified as a criminal. A threat to society.
There may be problems in society. And the majority of the population may even AGREE with you about those problems. But they do NOT want to have to deal with non-State violence. They see enough of that (and its effects) from criminals.
I am a UCD almnus (class of 2007) and classifying the student body as "mildly conservative" is not accurate. Nor is the claim that most students come from the central valley. Most students come from the San Francisco Bay area or other population centers around the state, and most students, like college students everywhere, are liberal-leaning. I agree that most protests do not effect the changes they strive for, but I don't think the "right to protest" is something you should give away so casually. You pay the salaries of the people who assaulted your classmates and you don't seem to care. There is some form of protest on the quad virtually every week, and only recently have our campus police forces (across the US, not just Davis) started breaking them up.
and I hope he has a problematic life for the rest of his life, too. I hope he can't get a job or gets made fun of by 'the other bullies in blue' until he dies.
I do understand that pepper spraying someone without cause is a violent crime, an insanely painful assault with occasional adverse reactions and even rare deaths, but how can you possibly advocate such a punishment?
Our theory of social wrong and our justice system are at least in theory based on reformation: people are punished in hope that they 'go forth and sin no more', to use the biblical phrasing. People are fired for gross misconduct at work and left to seek another job, not ostracized for life. Criminals are prosecuted, punished and then released under appropriate restrictions, not destroyed and left to suffer. If Lt. Pike is both a criminal and a bad employee why is it not sufficient to see him fired, bared from law enforcement, and prosecuted? Why do you want his life to be over? And what kind of sick bastard are you that you'd consider letting him continue working in law enforcement simply so he could endure the mockery of his co-workers? Leave a man who committed a violent crime in a position of physical authority, and then make his life steadily worse? Where do you think that's going to end?
You're asking us to ruin a man's life rather than give him a second chance, to torture him forever rather than rehabilitate and restrict him. Your options are that he endure constant abuse at work or be unable to work at all? Why not just shoot him?
How is this vengeful destruction of this man's dignity and potential any better than than what he's done to the protesters? How can you call yourself American when you advocate vengeance and lifelong suffering in the name of justice?
If 'his type is what is wrong with America' then what are you? Do you believe you're what's right with America?!
The Ninth Circuit has already ruled on this sort of situation.. the courts will and must revoke the police's qualified immunity against claims of excessive force. Let the lawsuits begin: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1332957.html
And then very quietly, a shift happens. They see a cop who seems a touch nervous and somewhere in the back of their mind, they think danger. Then they think they shouldn't have to think "danger" when they see a cop. After a while, they tell their kids to avoid cops entirely, even if they're lost. Slowly but surely, the population comes to think of the police as an enemy. An invading force they don't want in their neighborhood.
Minorities are way ahead of the curve on that one for various good reasons, but the rest of the population is catching up.
Even though I obey the law, the more stuff like this I see, the more I regard the police as a potential enemy.
They were committing a misdemeanor by blocking a SIDEWALK. You're argument is akin to arguing that it's OK to pepper spray someone for Jaywalking. What the officer did was assault under the color of authority. That he warned them before he indiscriminately sprayed them and the crowd doesn't change the fact that he assaulting individuals who were not a threat. Pepper spray and Tasers have their place, unfortunately, but it's not to spray a bunch of protesters engaged in a non-violent misdemeanor. The purpose of Pepper spray and Tasers is to replace the truncheon and gun in violent situations where the VIOLENT suspect can be subdued rather than shot or beat into restraints.
Unfortunately the effectiveness of these weapons and that they don't generally cause long term damage has caused police to begin using them as payback weapons. Used to inflict pain for disobedience rather than to stop a violent situation where life threatening measures would be called for. What that officer did was nothing short of assault. They could have pulled those people apart by hand, it would have taken time and been tiring but if they wanted them gone that bad they could have done it. Not a single protester threatened those officers with violence and the use of pepper spray only constituted assault. It was used to punish the protesters for refusing to comply.
I'll point out that in 1997 some protesters chained themselves together (with hardened steel pipe to make it even harder to separate them) and the cops selectively( as in not indiscriminately) dabbed their eyes (only the eyelids) with pepper spray swabs, the courts later ruled it was a violation of the 4th amendment. I'll say it one last time, the reason people are outraged is that the cop assaulted under the color of authority every protester there and he should be charged with the upgraded assault charge that carries for every single protester and bystander that got sprayed. Under no circumstance should he ever be allowed to be a peace officer in the state of California again.
You may be thinking of the Cracked.com article: "5 ways we ruined the occupy wall street generation." Good article, and definitely worth a read.
Turns out they're significantly wealthier, whiter and more educated than the average American.
Do you understand percentages? Above average is still included in 99% ...
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-
The amount of belligerent, right wing disgust for people trying to assert their democratic right to protest astonishes me. Yet I suppose these right wind nut jobs are the same people who keep ranting about the right to bear arms to defend oneself against the government.
I wish to have mod points to mods to raise the parent post even higher. It is good to see that there are at least some people here who see the difference between justice and revenge.
It is appauling to see to what height of bloodthirstiness people work themselves into. My opinion is that this is a result of very conservative culture and the sheer feer that Americans subject themselves to (Especially since 9/11). They are afraid of their government, corporations, foreign cultures and different religions. From what I read on Slashdot and elsewhere, quite a sizable percentage of the population own and train in the use of firearms because they fear to walk on the streets unarmed due to the perception that criminals are everywhere and house invasions to be commonplace. This gives me the impression that Americans are frightened of even each other.
And the result of all that buildup of fear is disproportional lashing out at any perceived threat. An analogy would be like a person with mild arachnophobia finding a very scary, poisonous-looking spider in the evening in his bedroom. He can try to capture it to release it outside, but he is too frightened of the possibility that it might get back in again. So he would thoroughly kill it just to be able to sleep comfortably.
When you are greatly afraid, why would you trust mental health facilities to rehabilitate the sexual offender, when permanently isolating, driving him to suicide or execution would bring a guaranteed removal of the threat?
Very sadly even much less hideous crimes result in backlashes. Apperently even if you never hurt anyone but get caught in the act of using illicit drugs results in you being sent to prison. I also find it shocking how prisons are not viewed as a place of rehabilitation but as a way to inflict vengence. I base that on the attitude of how prison rape is viewed not a problem, but as a source humour and almost endoursement since it is people who are accused of crimes that are the victums.
Of course everything above is just my personal opinion and how I explain to myself the reason for such harshness of the American justice system. Another explanation I found was in a freely available, easy to read book by Bob Altemeyer called The Authoritarians. Trouble is that you really can't tell if it is just another biased opinion.