zlacker

>>novia+(OP)
Probably a bit of a controversial opinion but in some cases I can sympathize with the police officers. The reality is that the vast majority of them likely condemn the events around George Floyd's death. They are also regular people with families, children and friends they have to provide for. And they have the exact same problems that many of us do. Their daily work involves keeping things in order, which is something I respect. That said, the first video I opened at random[1] shows a small number of people blocking a road in what looks more like a civil war scene rather than a protest. And the authorities are greeted with "F-U" and people tossing objects at them. The people in uniforms are ordinary people. Put yourself in their shoes and tell me: having all the problems you have, seeing all the destruction, which in all cases is no longer a protest, people shouting "f-u" and throwing stuff at you: You can be the most mentally stable human being but everyone has a limit. Many of those men are possibly working overtime, in extreme conditions and I bet they would much rather be with their kids or sick parents for instance. With this idea in mind, I personally can't picture myself being able to remain calm and not overstep my boundaries sooner or later.

Now putting myself in the shoes of the protesters: seeing the same destruction, destroying of properties, cars and businesses, I'll call it a day because this is no longer a protest. I'd go back home and wait for this to be taken care of and join a civilized protest once this has been taken care of. A civilized country should be able to hold a civilized protest. And having spent most of my life in eastern Europe, you can say I know a thing or two about protests. Last large protest I was a part of was in ~2013 irrc and the aftermath was very different. The night after each of those protests, everything was spotless clean, people thew all their garbage in the bins, nothing broken or destroyed. People were coming with their children and pets and being completely comfortable with it. There was a completely unrelated incident of a gas explosion at a Chinese restaurant, which burned a nearby shop. People gathered donations fo the shop owner to recover. Incidents with police? Practically none during ~3 months of daily protest. And we are talking eastern Europe - the police officers are anything but the nicest people on the planet.

[1] https://twitter.com/XruthxNthr/status/1266903223220097024

>>axegon+3a
> A civilized country should be able to hold a civilized protest.

The protests started out peaceful but became less peaceful when the police showed up and tear gassed innocent crowds. There's people literally getting arrested for practicing their right to assemble and right to freedom of speech.

>>miguel+Ga
That is the thing about collectivism though. Imagine one person throwing a bottle from the crowd at the police(something which can be seen in tons of videos). The idea of collectivism implies that the crowd itself is no longer innocent at that point. Not to mention the destruction of public and private properties. The words "rights" and "responsibilities" go hand in hand and people love ignoring that fact.

>>axegon+Wb
> That is the thing about collectivism though. Imagine one person throwing a bottle from the crowd at the police(something which can be seen in tons of videos). The idea of collectivism implies that the crowd itself is no longer innocent at that point.

You are confusing the idea of collectivism (in which each individual is responsible for the welfare of the members of the group, and is expected to sacrifice to some extent—different variations on collectivism vary on the extent—their own welfare for the common good) with the concept of collective punishment (a widely recognized violation of human rights and, in the context of armed conflict, a war crime, in which members of a group are punished for mere shared membership in a group which contains wrongdoers, without any evidence of collaboration in or support for the wrongdoing.)

They are not equivalent.

>>dragon+Oc
A mass protest is by all means a form of collectivism. Everyone has the right to protest and everyone has the responsibility to keep it civilized. Collective punishment may be a violation of human right and it should be condemned but what is your solution when you have the manpower of say 1,000 people vs a crowd of 100,000 and your task is to make sure that the city is still there the next morning? Just do the math.

>>axegon+be
> A mass protest is by all means a form of collectivism.

No, it's not. Participation in a mass protest may be motivated by collectivist ideals, or it can be motivated by the individualist ideal that it is better to discourage a government course of action that could in the future be of grave danger to you individually, and that the immediate risk of participation in the protest is less than the long-term risk of the policy being protested against.

People of ideologized strictly and emphatically opposed to collectivism engage in mass protests.

> Collective punishment may be a violation of human right [...]

> what is your solution when [...] your task is to make sure that the city is still there the next morning?

The legitimate task of the police is to protect the rights of all (innocent, suspect, and even, except to the extent specifically and legitimately deprived due to their guilt, the guilty). There is no circumstances when participation in a gross abuse of human rights is within the scope of their legitimate task.

>>dragon+og
My point is that it isn't black and white scenario. Make no mistakes, there are policemen who are nothing more than organic waste, I've had encounters with such: I was pulled out of a car by the neck, tossed on the ground by 4 heavily armed policemen while they completely thrashed my car. Did I get a "We're sorry" after they figured out that I was not the guy they were after? No, I literally got "GTFO NOW". But... Let's stick to the math.

You've provided the theory, but you didn't answer my practical question: you have 1000 people representing authority and 100,000 people crowd. Let's say 4% of that crowd is violent. That is still 4 times your capacity. All while a large number of the remaining 96k are shouting at you. Put yourself in the shoes of those 1000 and your task being "restore order". In which case, the ball is in the crowd's yard. As an outside spectator(and someone who literally grew up in the epicenter of daily protests as a child), what I'm seeing here is the recent South Park episode turning into a documentary.

It's really easy to quote laws and rules, but in the real world, they are not always applicable. And in the case of mass gatherings, they are hardly ever applicable. Are you seriously suggesting that you were never put in a position where your only course of action was to grossly break the rules? If so, I envy you, I really do. No one hates breaking the rules more than I do but on many occasions in life, I've had to. It doesn't have to do with how rules and laws are defined or implemented. It's simple math: you have two bricks and three holes to fill, otherwise your house will flood. It's the same story with the pandemic - no one wants lockdowns or businesses crashing but it's either that or the death of millions.