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.
Blog explaining the protest:
http://studentactivism.net/2011/11/20/ten-things-you-should-know-about-fridays-uc-davis-police-violence/
Sig? Heil
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.
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."
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-
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
Actually, there is precedent in case law that pepper-spraying nonviolent protesters is assault.
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1332957.html
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
If you watch the videos, you see that Lt Pike instructs the students (who are blocking his exit with detainees, i.e obstructing the police - but they were trying to get arrested because they wanted to force the cops to arrest everyone) that if they don't move when the police car which they are bringing gets there, then he will shoot them.
That is not a legal order. He can only say "I will arrest you, and I might hurt you if you resist". He also doesn't keep his word: he pepper spays them instead of shooting them, and he does so before they have an opportunity to move out of the way of for the police car. Moreover, he prevents the other officers from trying to move/detain them.
Regards
-Jeremy
Did you see the video? They were very scary weren't they? Sitting down on the ground like that with their arms pinned and not moving. So scary that the officer felt the need to prance around spraying them while his mates turned their backs to the protesters.
Here is the video.
He even shows the pepper spray can to everyone (including the cameras), and he goes back and forth along the chain twice as he sprays them. And then he goes around once more and sprays individual people who didn't get the full thing on the first go one by one. Interestingly enough, even though the guys at the other end were already seeing what's coming for them, only one guy tried to move away...
Of course, this was completely and utterly pointless. Pepper spray is a tool given to police to subdue violent people without resorting to lethal force, or to make the crowd back off; it's not there to make their job easier when dealing with non-violent law-breakers. Furthermore, in this case it didn't even make the job easier - if their goal was to move the people aside so that the walkway is no longer blocked, pepper spraying them from all sides while they are sitting is not going to achieve this; what you end up with is a bunch of sitting people vomiting because of pepper spray, only contributing to the mess. Finally, as seen on video, after pepper spraying, the cops just come there and pick them up and drag away one by one - which they could do just as well from the get go.
It is clear that the use of pepper spray was not in any way, shape or form to stop those people from breaking a law, but was an arbitrary extra-judicial punishment imposed by the cop in question on the protesters for ignoring his command to move away. The very theatrical way in which it is delivered only makes it this much more evidenced.