8
9

BART may drop protest charges (sfgate.com)

el_Sharko が 投稿

並べ替え:
ベスト
ベスト
トップ
新着
注目
論争中
古い順
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]binaryMission -7 ポイント-6 ポイント  (50子コメント)

Well, a lot of comments here expressing their dissatisfaction with this news. I wonder why? I think it's probably because people who would ordinarily concede the right to protest are actually being affected this time around.

Protesting isn't illegal, so this good news if you care at all about civic liberties. It is easy to look at these protesters as simply being disruptive--certainly, the critics of their message couldn't be more pleased to be able to push this reductionist viewpoint. "Look, they are causing such a ruckus! How could their message have any merit if they are resorting to such pettiness as delaying your commute?" -- Is how I imagine their argument goes. I've heard this numerous times, I don't think I'm constructing a strawman and would be happy to debate other criticism.

It's true that the protesters are fucking over people who might agree with their message (in fact, many people chose to sit out this particular protest for this reason). However, the argument is that it is for the greater good. By doing something so highly visible, there is no way to ignore the fact that these protests exist--which is very very easy to do when they are confined to "free speech zones" outside of the BART fare gates. By forcing people to take notice, the protesters are hoping that their message cannot be ignored: "We are here, we are pissed off, and we are not sitting quietly until something is done"

People forget that the protests of Martin Luther King, Jr. were similarly disruptive, occupying the storefronts and courthouses of racist segregationists. There was no heed of "free speech zones" when marching from Selma to Montgomery, traffic was shut down and I'm sure people sympathetic to the cause were inconvenienced too. It's easier to support the narrative of these protests because we can distance ourselves from the problem that was being fought--namely, the blanket racism of the south. I'm not proposing the BART administrators or majority of BART police are racist, but when people are being gunned down in subways for no reason it is a problem that needs to be addressed.

An exercise for the critic of the BART shutdown: How do you raise awareness for your cause without inconveniencing people? How do you force people to take notice without causing an annoyance?

[–]el_Sharko[S] 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (7子コメント)

Protesting isn't illegal

But blocking mass transit is, so...

[–]Meta_Bot2 [非表示スコア]  (0子コメント)

Someone submitted a link to this comment in the following subreddit:

This comment was posted by a bot, see /r/Meta_Bot for more info. Please respect rediquette, and do not vote or comment on the linked submissions. Thank you.

[–]justforflanFinancial District 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (17子コメント)

when people are being gunned down in subways for no reason

Really how often does that happen here? More people jump in front of a train in a month than get gunned down on BART in a decade.

[–]binaryMission -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (16子コメント)

Well, first of all, there is a fundamental difference between people getting gunned down and people jumping in front of the train. Mainly, in the latter scenario the accountability rests on the person doing the jumping or the system not providing care for the mentally ill--but certainly, BART cannot be held accountable. Whereas in the matter of a police shooting, there seems to be a total and seemingly systemic lack of accountability. Whether it is 1 or 100 people getting shot, there needs to be a process for review rather than the current policies that are designed to protect the officers doing the shooting.

[–]chengg 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (6子コメント)

Lack of accountability? Johannes Mehserle was charged with murder. The fact that he was only convicted of involuntary manslaughter wasn't BART's fault.

[–]binaryMission -5 ポイント-4 ポイント  (5子コメント)

The Oscar Grant case is only once instance of unchecked police brutality. The many instances of brutality taken as a whole indicate a systemic problem that has not resulted in any meaningful change from BART or outside judiciary body.

[–]el_Sharko[S] 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (4子コメント)

Ok, since that's "just one," how about you name three other recent examples of BART police "gunning people down for no reason?"

[–]justforflanFinancial District -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (8子コメント)

Sure BART can be accountable. Protest about BART not having barrier separation between the track and the platform. Or BART not having signage with help hotline numbers. -That- would be more relevant to being inside the fare gates.

[–]binaryMission -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (7子コメント)

I don't understand your point. Both are issues. Just because we can complain about BART not doing enough to prevent suicides (though I recall reading an argument that the barriers you talk about are not economically or technically viable) doesn't mean we can't also complain and agitate about the separate issue of police brutality.

[–]justforflanFinancial District -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (6子コメント)

Police brutality isn't an issue in the city. People getting shot in the Mission is an issue. Drug dealing in the Tenderloin is an issue. Phone theft at Civic Center is an issue. Chinese grannys getting mugged in the Sunset is an issue. Shit in the escalators is an issue. Drivers and cyclists not respecting right of way and traffic laws is an issue.

Now if you try to stop transit service for people trying to get to work in the city because they can't afford rent over some shit happening 1000+ miles away, that is an issue.

[–]binaryMission -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (5子コメント)

Well that's where you and I disagree. Maybe you'd find police brutality more of a problem if you were a minority? I'm fortunate to be white where I am not profiled as a threat, but many black and brown men do not have the same experience.

[–]justforflanFinancial District 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (4子コメント)

who are you to say I don't belong to a minority? yes yes I know you don't know what its like to face discrimination. Well guess what, I do.

Seeing yourself as a victim is just a self-fulfilling prophecy. fuck that

[–]binaryMission 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (3子コメント)

It's not about seeing yourself as a victim, it's about acknowledging that there are injustices in the world to be corrected. If you're not white (sorry, on reddit I just assume everyone is white) and you experience discrimination and you're not fighting against that, then I have no words. I cannot fathom how you would think that would be okay

[–]justforflanFinancial District -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (2子コメント)

lol so if I'm a minority and im not experiencing discrimination on BART does that make me some kind of unicorn? are you going to tell me I -should- be facing discrimination because I'm a minority and if I'm not experiencing it than I'm not the right kind of minority? or maybe I'm being oppressed and just too ignorant to see it? I should be angry and go protest because BART police treat me like any old upstanding citizen? LOLOL

[–]Pinatubo 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (9子コメント)

An exercise for the critic of the BART shutdown: How do you raise awareness for your cause without inconveniencing people? How do you force people to take notice without causing an annoyance?

How about a massive silent protest outside a police station?

Today's protesters resort to stunts like chaining themselves to trains because there are so few of them that any attempt to hold a legitimate protest or rally would just look pathetic.

[–]binaryMission 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (8子コメント)

Well, maybe you missed the Millions March in oakland and SF where there were literally thousands of protesters assembled outside various public buildings?

I don't know why you get to decide what a legitimate protest is. The purpose of the protest was to gain visibility and they did that. The fact that it inconvenienced people does not mean it ran counter to that purpose.

[–]Kalium 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (7子コメント)

The purpose of a protest is to advance a political agenda. A protest that creates more opposition than it does support is one that runs counter to its purpose.

[–]binaryMission 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (5子コメント)

Well, it's really hard to judge how much support/opposition it has created one way or another. I mean, it is a mere assumption that now everyone that rides BART hates the protesters.

Also I'd argue that the opposition created is probably more temporary as opposed to the a hopefully more meaningful support created. I guess some people might now hate the entire protesters forever and ever, but I would assume there are a healthy handful of people who were inconvenienced once and moved on--my point is, how many people are going to show up at a future protest in opposition to the #blacklivesmatter people? Because of one delay?

Weigh that against the people who were not aware of the issue before the delay and now seek to support it? I think (well, actually, I'd hope) that the desire to fight injustice is heavier than the petty outrage against those doing the fighting, but who knows?

[–]Kalium -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (4子コメント)

I can tell you with certainty that the protests created opposition where there was none before.

my point is, how many people are going to show up at a future protest in opposition to the #blacklivesmatter people? Because of one delay?

Probably very few. Have you considered how many might not vote for a candidate for office who supports #blacklivesmatter as a result, though?

I think (well, actually, I'd hope) that the desire to fight injustice is heavier than the petty outrage against those doing the fighting, but who knows?

Were you not just going on about the all-consuming power of outrage and how it overpowers reason?

[–]binaryMission -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (3子コメント)

Obviously it created opposition because I'm sitting on the internet arguing about it. But did it create no support? Doubt it. And who is to say which won out?

Were you not just going on about the all-consuming power of outrage and how it overpowers reason?

It is not against reason to support protests that are against current and frequent injustice. This is not a blind rage and you seem to want to make it out to be.

[–]Kalium -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (2子コメント)

It is not against reason to support protests that are against current and frequent injustice. This is not a blind rage and you seem to want to make it out to be.

Either outrage can be subjected to reason or it cannot. I'm afraid you really are going to have to pick one.

[–]binaryMission -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (1子コメント)

The fuck? There is a difference between blind rage and outrage. You're suggesting that people became outraged and staged a protest that angered a few people and hence were not being reasonable, and I wholeheartedly disagree.

[–]Kalium -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

So outrage can in fact be subjected to reason. Got it. Thanks! I'm happy we could come to agreement!

[–]Pinatubo -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

The actual purpose of some of these protests is to pretend to be a brave revolutionary in a safe environment.

[–]Kalium -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (11子コメント)

Well, a lot of comments here expressing their dissatisfaction with this news. I wonder why?

Because it inconvenienced a lot of people while accomplishing exactly nothing.

Protesting isn't illegal, so this good news if you care at all about civic liberties.

Time, place, and manner restrictions are real things. Get used to it.

By forcing people to take notice, the protesters are hoping that their message cannot be ignored: "We are here, we are pissed off, and we are not sitting quietly until something is done"

Instead, their message is being ignored as they get fury directed at them. After those fuckwits, I have pointedly avoided being aware of what any public transit oritented protest is about. I refuse to be aware, as my awareness of their message is exactly what they seek. I refuse to reward those protests.

An exercise for the critic of the BART shutdown: How do you raise awareness for your cause without inconveniencing people? How do you force people to take notice without causing an annoyance?

In Montgomery, they boycotted. That worked pretty damn well and didn't at all rely on bullshit grabs for headlines.

[–]binaryMission 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (10子コメント)

Because it inconvenienced a lot of people while accomplishing exactly nothing.

If the goal was to raise awareness, I'd say mission accomplished, no?

Time, place, and manner restrictions are real things. Get used to it.

I hope that when something moves you enough to speak out about it, you remember your words when someone tells you to be quiet and talk in a polite voice. I hope you are able to tame your outrage when you make it sound so easy to do.

In Montgomery, they boycotted. That worked pretty damn well and didn't at all rely on bullshit grabs for headlines.

Actually a large part of MLK's strategy was to get headlines. The marches and other activities were staged in a way to coerce the racist bureaucrats into public folly, so that the American people would be made aware of the horrible conditions rather than it being smoothed over after the fact.

While boycotting is a great tactic against businesses, BART is not a business. It is a government program, a public service that does not react to market pressure. Surely you see the difference here. Even if thousands and thousands of people protested by boycott, that is a very small dent in the average 400k weekday passengers. Does it mean a protest is not "worthy" when you can't shutdown a massive public system by boycott?

[–]Kalium -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (9子コメント)

If the goal was to raise awareness, I'd say mission accomplished, no?

Awareness is not a goal. Awareness is not a goal. Awareness is not a goal.

Say it with me now. Awareness is not a goal. Awareness is a tool to achieve a goal.

So what did they achieve?

I hope you are able to tame your outrage when you make it sound so easy to do.

Been there. Done that. Realized long ago that I have to subordinate emotion to reason if I want to actually accomplish anything.

Of course, if I just want to satisfy myself I've done something good while ensuring I have something to rail against tomorrow, lashing out at random is an excellent strategy.

While boycotting is a great tactic against businesses, BART is not a business. It is a government program, a public service that does not react to market pressure.

BART relies on fares. If a lot of the fares vanished, BART would definitely notice. Your pleading ignores this basic reality of BART.

Even if thousands and thousands of people protested by boycott, that is a very small dent in the average 400k weekday passengers.

Then perhaps you should re-evaluate how important it is for you to clog up a public transit system.

[–]binaryMission -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (8子コメント)

Premature to expect an immediate achievement. Took years of marching before MLK saw meaningful change in the south. If there is going to be an achievement it will be a while coming.

I think it's reductionist to say the protesters are simply lashing out at random. BART has been a symbol of the police brutality they are protesting--it was not a random target.

I'd also say you give boycotting far more credit than it probably deserves. It's an effective tool against small businesses. You are suggesting to boycott a public service. That is not effective, full stop.

[–]Kalium -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (7子コメント)

Boycotts brought the bus system in Montgomery to its knees by cutting off its cash flow. Clearly, that was a complete waste of time.

If you think cash flows to public services cannot be cut off, then I submit that a refresher in civics may be in order.

Oh yes - to most people, BART is a symbol of a daily commute. It's only "a symbol of the police brutality" to the people protesting. If your symbolism only makes sense to you, you may need to re-evaluate your protest methodology.

But there I go again, calling for rationality and reason in people too far gone in the grips of outrage to handle that. Maybe some modest (5-figures or so) fines will restore reason.

[–]binaryMission -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (6子コメント)

Hmm, I wonder what the size of the Montgomery bus system is compared to BART, or the number of minority riders in predominantly-black Alabama versus the racial hodgepodge here in the bay area?

Seriously, you're delusional if you think boycotts are viable. Or, maybe worse, you're just wanting the protesters to do something quietly and invisibly so you can ignore them and go about your day without ever being troubled about the very real problem of racial injustice manifest as police brutality and lack of accountability.

[–]Kalium -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (5子コメント)

Then I suggest you apply that reason you're falling back on and find a way to leverage the power you do have. Without making uninvolved people suffer for it. Even if you really believe it's for their own good, paternalistic bunch of BS that that is.

I want things to change. But I also want things to change in ways that don't suggest that any dozen assholes can extort whatever they want from ten million souls by blocking BART.

[–]binaryMission -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (4子コメント)

Yeah except the only application of reason you have presented has been the laughable use of boycott. Do you think if there were a million other viable and better solutions, the protesters would have resorted to this act? No. The fact is, protests are messy and piss people off. Sorry. If you really wanted things to change you'd see that it was a step in the right direction.

[–]Kalium 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (3子コメント)

If I agreed with your goals, I would have to agree with your means? Is that really what you believe?

[–]dboy999Parkside -5 ポイント-4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

youre fucking retarded