zlacker

[parent] [thread] 5 comments
1. bowmes+(OP)[view] [source] 2020-06-12 16:53:15
It wasn't a useless piece of turf, it was a park that the residents of the neighborhood, myself included, used to be able to enjoy. Now we can't, because hundreds are camping on the area.

I am all for their cause, but I feel like the methodology of 'camping in a park' is not the right way to enact civic change at a policy level.

replies(3): >>unders+q1 >>freeon+qb >>IG_Sem+yG
2. unders+q1[view] [source] 2020-06-12 17:00:04
>>bowmes+(OP)
So if the whataboutism of sleeping in the park were removed we could have a discussion about sharing the use of the park?
3. freeon+qb[view] [source] 2020-06-12 17:57:09
>>bowmes+(OP)
You can't go to the park, because it's too crowded, because people are gathering there to enact change.

I'm sorry, I simply disagree as to the role of public space in a free society -- them occupying the park is the LEAST objectionable thing about this.

replies(1): >>bowmes+ae
◧◩
4. bowmes+ae[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-12 18:14:14
>>freeon+qb
How is occupying the park enacting change?

I thought the meetings with the mayor were excellent, but via this avenue, all they are doing is changing the park.

There's a whole city out there where cops still operate under the same laws they have for many years. Protesters should try and change _that_, imho.

replies(1): >>CydeWe+qx2
5. IG_Sem+yG[view] [source] 2020-06-12 20:51:38
>>bowmes+(OP)
Finally! An actual resident speaks up.

Interesting how divergent the actual residents feel vs everyone else

Clearly this is a "fantastic idea" and "summer carnival feel" until they do it right on your back yard

How about these occupiers propise taking it to the area or zone they actually live in?

◧◩◪
6. CydeWe+qx2[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-13 17:09:56
>>bowmes+ae
That's exactly what the protesters are fighting for. Protests are almost by definition inconvenient to some people.
[go to top]