zlacker

[return to "Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone"]
1. conroy+fz1[view] [source] 2020-06-11 23:32:43
>>obilgi+(OP)
A friend lives in Seattle and texted me today about his visit last night:

> I was there last night and it's such a cool pseudo utopian place

> The media coverage of it is WILD

> People on the internet are convinced it's protected by armed guards and people are dying of hunger and instead its...like a music festival campground

> There are speakers, musicians, art walls. I took a group pic for a bunch of black guys last night and they were so proud of what was built because they felt like they fought for it, which in a sense, they did.

◧◩
2. pera+gF1[view] [source] 2020-06-12 00:30:01
>>conroy+fz1
> The media coverage of it is WILD

I live 7 blocks away from "the zone" and can confirm, I have never in my life seen anything alike in this regard. The scale of the misinformation being spread in social networks and news media reached a level I couldn't believe possible before. Seriously, it's beyond absurd.

If anyone is interested, I have been taking some pictures of the ongoing protests (including a few of the zone): https://www.flickr.com/photos/peramides

◧◩◪
3. gabesk+WW1[view] [source] 2020-06-12 03:41:14
>>pera+gF1
I'm also about that far away and walked through there last night. It felt more like a summer street fair festival. I also took a few pictures. https://photos.app.goo.gl/UN8RpwWS5TYAY5Nn7
◧◩◪◨
4. thu211+Rq2[view] [source] 2020-06-12 09:57:25
>>gabesk+WW1
But then there's also this:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EaQyClgU4AEJnWf?format=jpg&name=...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EaQyCmMUEAEn_1o?format=jpg&name=...

I've not before seen a summer street festival where armed militias wearing bulletproof vests patrol the streets.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. jakela+TT2[view] [source] 2020-06-12 14:19:52
>>thu211+Rq2
I truly don't understand the problem here. Can you tell me what it is that makes these people dangerous and scary, but the similarly armed protestors who showed up at government buildings a month ago — or, frankly, the police — fine?
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. YeGobl+Za3[view] [source] 2020-06-12 16:00:19
>>jakela+TT2
What makes these people dangerous and scary is that they're carrying dangerous and scary weapons. The flak jackets and face masks aren't making it any less scary either.

Personally, I'm not afraid of the police, of protesters, of armed militias, etc. I'm afraid of people with guns. Why does anyone carry a gun, unless they intend to use it, once some set of conditions obtain? I don't want to be around people like that, and I really don't want to live in places where they go around on public streets like this.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. Christ+JG3[view] [source] 2020-06-12 19:01:51
>>YeGobl+Za3
I think of it like nuclear weapons: it'd be great if they didn't exist at all, but if they do exist and are stockpiled by people who want to hurt us, then the only responsible action is to arm ourselves in self-defense.

In other words:

> An unarmed people are slaves or are subject to slavery at any given moment.

> -- Huey P Newton

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. YeGobl+hb4[view] [source] 2020-06-12 22:05:24
>>Christ+JG3
That's MAD, right? Mutually Assured Destruction. Well, that is the logic of a species that has gone kookoo bonkers bannanas bongos mad and thinks that "let's all threaten each other with total anihilation" is "rational". Why is it so hard to agree to not destroy each other needlessly instead?
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
9. kortex+bM4[view] [source] 2020-06-13 04:09:53
>>YeGobl+hb4
Game theory. The instant someone doesn't agree not to destroy, they have a massive upper hand.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦
10. YeGobl+sk5[view] [source] 2020-06-13 11:56:37
>>kortex+bM4
And then, what?

Suppose the world agrees to dismantle its nuclear arsenal but a single nation, the great atomic nation of Nuclearia, decides that it will keep its weapons and it will destroy the world unless every other nation obeys its rule. And assume Nuclearia has magickal weapons that do not affect Nuclearia lands, or its citizens. The world refuses to obey and Nuclearia unleashes the nuclear holocaust.

Now what? What did Nuclearia achieve by destroying the rest of the world with nuclear weapons? What will Nuclearia do in a world of its own? Note that the rest of the world is now a radioactive waste where nothing lives and nothing grows. Other nations' lands cannot be annexed and used for farming, because there is no fertile soil left anywhere. While some intrepid souls no doubt long to visit the great glass fields of New York, spending any time outside Nuclearia is deadly and most of the world is a depressing burned desert so travel is pointless and tourism is a joke. International commerce of course is out of the question because there is no other nation than Nuclearia. Any resources, such as metals, gases, fossil fuels etc are limited to what Nuclearia has in its own territory. Any scientific progress is limited to what Nuclearian scientists can achieve on their own, without any input from the outside, given that there is nothing on the outside.

How does destroying everyone else increased Nuclearia's chances of survival?

How do you protect yourself by destroying everyone else?

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦▧
11. kortex+zn6[view] [source] 2020-06-13 21:20:22
>>YeGobl+sk5
I was actually talking about gun ownership, not nukes, but it's eerily similar.

You don't glass everybody immediately. Nuclearia basically does a protection racket. Do what we want, or we progressively make an example of you. Each "round" is 1) issue demand 2) if no compliance, respond with N units of force 3) N++ 4) repeat until results. Rebels get the Alderaan treatment. Rule by fear. Either every country decides to let themselves get scorched to prevent Nuclearia taking resources as a last FU, bend the knee, or re-arm. But one well-placed rebel ICBM ought to dissuade Nuclearia from their racket.

Having some subpopulation (police or even military) with guns but not the populace is a similar power dynamic. It doesn't take many "rebels" to make the hegemony think twice about a takeover. But a complete monopoly on power means a "clean sweep" military coup with minimal bloodshed is possible. My finding of the world is that most people just want to live their life and do their thing. So in such a takeover, I believe most people would just fold. But a small rebel % can turn that bloodless takeover into an indefinite boondoggle.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦▧▨
12. tekkni+UF7[view] [source] 2020-06-14 14:22:55
>>kortex+zn6
I feel like you need to read the history of at least WW2 again just based off of that 3rd to last sentence.
[go to top]