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. DenisM+Fm3[view] [source] 2020-06-12 17:02:08
>>jakela+TT2
The police follow orders from their chain of command that goes up to an elected official. You can petition the elected official, occupy their building, grill them in the media, and vote them out if you convince the other citizens. For example the knee-to-the-neck move was a part of the "orders" in that it was part of standard procedure and it is now being revised and removed. Similarly the tear gas was part of the procedure and has now been suspended by the order of the mayor. This can only be done because of the chain of command.

The people with masks and weapons on the street report to no-one we know, it's either a loose anarchic group or some sort or they report to a warlord. Can you petition the warlord? Occupy their office? Vote them out? This is a regression to the medieval model of governance.

It's all fun and games when no one really disagrees about anything important, but things change for the worse when disagreements start happening. This is how communes fall - either they fail to disagree constructively or they get subjugated by a dictator who forces an agreement.

This is why we tolerate the police for a few hundred years now - on occasion they cause violence that's predictable and can be influenced. The alternative is the violence we cannot influence and that spiral out of control when the going gets tough.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. jakela+Or3[view] [source] 2020-06-12 17:29:18
>>DenisM+Fm3
> This is why we tolerate the police for a few hundred years now - on occasion they cause violence that's predictable and can be influenced.

The point of these protests is that the violence is not occasional. It is endemic, and attempts to stop it stretch back centuries. It has persisted across the country, under both progressive and conservative politicians, despite many, many attempts to eliminate it.

If the violent system we have has successfully resisted change and accountability for hundreds of years, how is this a regression?

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. AnHone+oC3[view] [source] 2020-06-12 18:33:33
>>jakela+Or3
Police are safer than cars, by an order of magnitude.

The only violence I’ve seen from police that doesn’t seem like an anomaly is violence that protestors incited by starting a conflict with the police.

So, empirically, it seems like the violence is occasional except when you go asking for it and the protestors just have a problem with authority and society at large.

It’s why their complaints are big on individual sob stories but lacking statistics to back them up.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
9. dragon+wD3[view] [source] 2020-06-12 18:40:02
>>AnHone+oC3
> Police are safer than cars,

For whom and per...what? Encounter? Mile traveled with them?

> The only violence I’ve seen from police that doesn’t seem like an anomaly is violence that protestors incited by starting a conflict with the police.

That suggests to me that either your perception of provocation or of anomaly is skewed (or that “anomaly” is used in the software sense of “behavior out of line with spec” rather than the more general sense of “behavior out of line with what is normal”.)

> So, empirically,

You just recounted what is, by the terms used, your subjective impression, and termed your conclusion built on that (which go far beyond what is justified even if that impression was undisputed fact) “empirical”.

That’s...not what that word means.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦
10. AnHone+RF3[view] [source] 2020-06-12 18:54:26
>>dragon+wD3
Per arrest to one year of driving: you would have to be arrested ten times in a year for your risk from the police to match your risk driving a car that year.

Per arrest for violent crime (where most of the deaths occur), blacks are safer than whites.

I’ve been reviewing the footage from Seattle — and protestors started every instance of violence by first getting forceful with the cops.

Show me any evidence that there’s an endemic problem of violence — because nothing I can find in either statistics about harm or footage from protests suggests there is.

That’s an empiric conclusion: studying the statistics about how often police harm people and comparing them to other sources of risk — which show they’re relatively minor.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦▧
11. andrew+I78[view] [source] 2020-06-14 17:31:27
>>AnHone+RF3
> I’ve been reviewing the footage from Seattle — and protestors started every instance of violence by first getting forceful with the cops.

That's funny, because the majority of the clips I've seen have unprovoked or inappropriate responses from the police. Seattle alone [0] has had numerous incidents. It's trivially easy to see this, to the point that one would have to ignore many incidents to say "every instance" was started by protestors.

I believe that you are not arguing in good faith.

[0]: https://github.com/2020PB/police-brutality/blob/master/repor...

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦▧▨
12. AnHone+Qca[view] [source] 2020-06-15 14:15:27
>>andrew+I78
Can you elaborate on which of those clips you find that the police initiated or acted inappropriately?

The first one is what we should want to happen — a misplaced knee was moved by a colleague. There’s no context to decide if police inappropriately started an altercation. There’s no extended period of a knee on someone’s neck.

The second is police responding to someone on the ground fighting them and physically resisting arrest.

The third is pepper spraying a crowd that was refusing to move and let the police form a line, after someone lunged at the police.

The fourth is completely context free, and while unfortunate that a child was there, it doesn’t give us context to judge.

Your source also is using selective clips, that remove context to focus on emotionally triggering scenes.

[go to top]