Comment by briandear | Hacker News Reader

Comment by briandear | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Was everyone wearing masks and practicing social distancing of at least 6 feet? Weren’t we told that the reopen protesters were putting people at risk by protesting from their cars? I don’t disagree with the reason for protest, but if a church can’t be open, even outdoors, and an extended family picnic is illegal in a public park, then I am not sure the rationale for allowing protests now. The first amendment isn’t conditional on the reasons for gathering or speaking. The mayor of Oakland even supported the protests held there while just recently maintaining that “non-essential” businesses couldn’t open. I am just trying to reconcile why a small restaurant in Oakland can’t be open, but thousands of people marching in a massive group is somehow allowed. And it seems, politically speaking that a similar demographic that was just days ago telling everyone to stay home to protect us from the plague suddenly changed their public health tune as soon as something they care about was the issue.

Are the lockdowns optional now? Are they situational depending on the politics of the event? Because it sure seems like it. Georgia got hammered for reopening too early, but nobody had much to say about Atlanta having massive protests over the past days. Either the lockdowns are unnecessary or they are necessary and people are putting public health at serious risk with these “large gatherings.”

I wish we could reboot 2020. It’s a g-damned mess.

Nobody likes that these protests are likely to lead to increased transmission. It's a truly terrible choice. People are making that choice because these protests get to such a fundamental problem in our society that they are still worth it, despite the cost. And, as has been mentioned, mask usage is high, and these protests are outside. It doesn't eliminate the risk, but many, many people are still trying to minimize the public health risk.

So, yes, context matters. I would absolutely argue the value in the being part of the strongest push against police brutality in decades, that just might result in systemic change, is incredibly more worthy than virtually any other activity. It does not mean there is no public health cost. It does mean it is a tragic choice to have to make.

Work. Volunteer. Take care of your family. Vote. It's a bit of a bad timing for protests right now - easily exploited, will likely result in negative change.

perhaps ask the US police if they could kill unarmed black males at more appropriate times maybe?

It is not a good idea to protest on the streets right now. It is selfish to protest on the streets. First - it spreads COVID. Which kills people in thousands. Second - it prolongs shelter-in-place and associated damage. Third, likely increases the possibility of re-election of the current president.

Yes, I and about 90% of the crowd wore masks. Yes, we did our best to keep 6 feet but not always, hence the masks. People were walking around with hand sanitizer to share.

A global pandemic is awful, but it does not alleviate us of our civic responsibility.

Was it uncomfortable and difficult? Yes. Am I glad I went? Hell yes. Black lives matter.

> but it does not alleviate us of our civic responsibility.

The protests haven’t worked though for the last 20 years or so. IMO it’s more important to vote and promote change than to block traffic.

People remember how you made them feel more easily than what you actually said. Preventing them from getting somewhere is a great way to just piss people off.

It’s no wonder that the protests over the last 20 years haven’t worked to garner more support considering that those who do participate are treated with violent retaliation. Maybe if those of us begging to be heard were allowed to speak, and scream and chant, it would inspire more people to unite, organize and vote.

Occupy Wall Street was not meant with violence and it was huge headline grabbing protests that went on for weeks. It didn’t do anything meaningful.

IMO the media was not talking about income & wealth inequality before OWS. OWS forced it on the agenda and changed the very language we use to describe it: “the 99% vs the 1%”. That’s a big deal.

> It didn’t do anything meaningful

How do you know? Do you have an alternate timeline of history to compare it to?

Well none of the things the protesters wanted (broken up banks, more taxes for the rich, arrested bank execs, more social entitlements, etc) came to fruition.

I'd say it raised a lot of awareness, which is exactly what protests are for. Protests don't create laws, they raise awareness. Based on that awareness, people vote and change laws.

> Maybe if those of us begging to be heard were allowed to speak, and scream and chant, it would inspire more people to unite, organize and vote.

You can. As far as I know, the US is still a democratic country with elections.

Is it even worth going through the ways in which US democracy is broken? From the electoral system itself all the way down to extremely obvious voter suppression efforts (often specifically targeting black people), you really can't be too surprised that people do not feel that their voices are being heard.

It's not perfect so the solution is to just burn it all down?

Why do you think the people protesting want to burn down the entirety of US democracy? Nothing I have seen would suggest that.

You know, whining about blocked intersections is even less compelling during the never ending lockdown...

You've got it backwards. Voting and promoting change is what has not worked. Economic damage is likely to be the only thing that's going to persuade the elites to throw the working class a bone. You're witnessing the anger of the masses in its most pure form here.

Where is the MLK of 2020? I want to see someone who can go beyond their anger and have a plan and lead.

So they can be assassinated? Good plan. (sarcasm indicator. It is not a good plan at all.)

MLK was despised by white America of his time, _because_ of his leadership of protests.

You remember a few years back when some athletes took knelt during the national anthem?

And they were told to "shut up and dribble" and the president said they were sons of bitches and should be fired? [1]

There's your peaceful leadership right there.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._national_anthem_protests_...

If you're black in the US, there's just no correct way to protest. Street protests get painted as riots (and often turn into riots due to excessive police response fanning the flames), quiet personal protests are claimed to be disrespectful (since when is kneeling a sign of disrespect?), speak up and they get told to shut up. There's no way to win.

There are many of them. They dont get media coverage. They "miss the cutoff" for debates. The party doesnt give them a chance. Even so called "liberal media" do hit jobs on them.

Then, people who are complacent complain no one is trying.

Voting has changed things. Every legislative change comes from your representatives, not some unelected force that only reacts to violence.

You just don’t like the priorities of everyone else so you’re claiming it hasn’t worked.

>> You just don’t like the priorities of everyone else so you’re claiming it hasn’t worked.

That bit is correct. Yes, it does work -- for some. But the masses that are angry are whom it didn't work for. When it starts working for the other 90% people wont be as angry.

> Economic damage

Exactly how is destroying low income housing, small businesses (many of them minority owned) and peoples places of employment going to persuade "the elites"?

I'm not promoting or condoning violence. But Apple shut down their retail stores over this, so it definitely is impacting "the elites" to some extent.

I own shares of Apple via my retirement plan. Am I elite?

Are you purposely being obtuse? Or are you trying to argue against a different point than the one I made?

If not, please explain how you having a mutual fund means that "the elites" who control Apple aren't impacted by lost revenue.

I'm really lost here. How exactly will hurting Apple sales help resolve police violence?

I don't think we're there yet, and I think we can still use the ballot box to effect change, but fear of a socialist revolution and mob violence was one of the catalysts behind the new deal.

So if you can't understand how hurting the pocket books of "the elite" can encourage them to compromise, you haven't been paying attention to history.

History says that mob violence is probably more likely to lead to a dictatorship than to another new deal, but you're being willfully ignorant if you don't acknowledge the existence of a potential chain of consequences that starts with "damaging companies' bottom lines" and ends with policy change.

Yes.

Ok. Then a good 50% of this country is elite. What a dumb definition.

If a large enough share of your income is returns on capital to both meet your expenses and increase the store of capital, or you have a sufficient store of capital that depleting with your expenses would take lifetimes even though it isn't growing after expenses, you can plausibly held to be in the haut bourgeoisie, the elite of capitalist society. If you are an intellectual worker with a modest amount of stock held through a retirement fund, your probably between the proletarian intelligentsia (in the working class, if among the better working conditions and higher pay of that class) and the petit bourgeoisie (the capitalist middle class), but not at all elite.

I believe protests were working, but progress has since been reversed. Police militarization is controversial. The previous administration made efforts like 'Smart on Crime' and federal laissez-faire approach to marijuana enforcement.

Many of these issues were reversed in an attempt to be tough on crime again with a big push from the AG in 2017. Tensions have been stoked by things like a pardon dealt out to a sheriff who violated a court order relating to racial profiling. I have a hard time believing these acts aren't having their intended effects.

Polite protests are completely ignored. And if the political system was working for them they would not feel the need to protest.

Voting and "promoting" change hasn't worked either.

Plus, it's awfully hard to avoid spraying spit and snot on everyone around you when you're getting tear-gassed. I know, I've been cs-gassed many, many times. The police are not helping the situation with this tactic.

> Was everyone wearing masks and practicing social distancing of at least 6 feet?

Are you suggesting shooting rubber bullets is an appropriate means to enforce social distancing?

The US is less of a United Monolith and more of a Spaghetticoded States of America. Look out world, we're agile!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com