Protesting during a pandemic (split)

Discussions about serious topics, for serious people
Post Reply
User avatar
Stephanie
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2896
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:38 pm
Location: clinging tenaciously to your buttocks

Re: Protesting during a pandemic (split)

Post by Stephanie » Thu Jun 04, 2020 10:33 pm

No that's not what's happening. I am tired, and about to go to bed, and I'd quite like the other mods to get an opportunity to look over the thread, given some of the accusations being made.

Would be great if people could try to assume good faith, maybe not jump to insults, and instead take into account that folk feel quite strongly about what's happening around the world at the moment. And I mean both pandemics and protests.
"I got a flu virus named after me 'cause I kissed a bat on a dare."

User avatar
EACLucifer
Stummy Beige
Posts: 4177
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: In Sumerian Haze

Re: Protesting during a pandemic (split)

Post by EACLucifer » Thu Jun 04, 2020 10:41 pm

Bird on a Fire wrote:
Thu Jun 04, 2020 10:23 pm
lpm wrote:
Thu Jun 04, 2020 10:16 pm
Bird on a Fire wrote:
Thu Jun 04, 2020 9:29 pm
Ignoring context doesn't make you look clever.
Exactly. Well said.

The context is:

- a pandemic killing over 200 UK citizens per day currently
- an urgent need for the UK to get the rate down fast
- a lockdown in force that makes gatherings illegal
- even more important than legality, the entire purpose and spirit of the rules are to prevent gatherings
- a high level of support across society for the lockdown, with the public being more enthusiastic than the government
- a high degree of solidarity with healthcare workers, key workers and the vulnerable, with thousands of people volunteering, joining local support groups and offering their services as citizens
- millions of people worried about their elderly loved ones, vulnerable loved ones and themselves
- deliberate attempts to sabotage the lockdown by right wing agitators, selfish elites and ignorant rule breakers

Ignoring the context also means ignoring solidarity, ignoring progressive principles and ignoring the wishes of our society.
That's part of the context, yes. I think all of us agree on that half.

Now list the rest of it and you'll have caught up.
I think most of us agree on that, too. The issue is not "was there a cold blooded murder of a black man by a police officer in the States, where almost a thousand people are killed a year by police, with black people disproportionately affected by this and by the prison-industrial complex", nor is it "are there problems of institutional racism in the UK including disproportionate interference by police in the lives of and indifference to the welfare of BAME people, as shown by events like the Grenfell fire". It is entirely possible to excoriate the organisers and attendees of the British protests while accepting and supporting those assessments of events, and the need for change as soon as possible and as fast as possible.

It's as follows;

If this is a response to events in the US - specifically the murder of George Floyd and the use of violence against peaceful vigils and protests - why is a very high risk protest needed in London, one of the worst hit cities in the world?

If this is about ongoing issues in the UK, why now? If this is, as some of those trying to justify their attendance have suggested, about Grenfell, why was it ok to wait nearly three years to go on the streets, but not to wait a little longer until their protest would not kill people?

along with Why did the generally low risk student age organisers and protestors choose to encourage the riskiest possible behaviours when they could have called for safer protesting, eg silent vigils

User avatar
dyqik
Princess POW
Posts: 7527
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:19 pm
Location: Masshole
Contact:

Re: Protesting during a pandemic (split)

Post by dyqik » Thu Jun 04, 2020 10:51 pm

Related to the second question: timing of mass protest movements isn't planned in advance. As BoaF said above, the pandemic lockdowns and economic issues likely played a role in protests in the US kicking off now, raising tensions generally. Particularly with the highly visible heavily armed right wing protestors walking into State Houses without being bothered by the police.

The UK and US populaces are fairly tightly connected online, due to shared language. The tension in the US is clearly raising tensions in the UK as well.

That's not justification for protesting now in the UK (and please note that I haven't advocated for more protests to be held in the UK), but it's an explanation of some of the dynamics going on.

Herainestold
After Pie
Posts: 2029
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2019 1:23 pm

Re: Protesting during a pandemic (split)

Post by Herainestold » Thu Jun 04, 2020 10:58 pm

The underlying connection is that both the US and UK systems are based on exploiting POC and repressing their rights.
Masking forever
Putin is a monster.
Russian socialism will rise again

User avatar
lpm
Junior Mod
Posts: 5944
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:05 pm

Re: Protesting during a pandemic (split)

Post by lpm » Thu Jun 04, 2020 11:01 pm

EACLucifer wrote:
Thu Jun 04, 2020 10:41 pm
along with Why did the generally low risk student age organisers and protestors choose to encourage the riskiest possible behaviours when they could have called for safer protesting, eg silent vigils
There have been some dramatic socially distanced protests in other countries, with people standing on a 2 metre grid - Israel, Hague, Athens. Makes for great photos and got more attention due to the novelty.

The elegant protest of the doctors kneeling for PPE has already been posted.

Clapping for carers has been one of the country's most widespread ever expression of solidarity - nothing like it since the country's Princess Di mourning.

The spread of rainbow drawings by children is another expression of our society's shared goal - a visual statement that we all stand together.

Yet another march through London followed by inaudible speeches over a crappy sound system is a missed opportunity. Got little coverage as a result.
⭐ Awarded gold star 4 November 2021

User avatar
dyqik
Princess POW
Posts: 7527
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:19 pm
Location: Masshole
Contact:

Re: Protesting during a pandemic (split)

Post by dyqik » Thu Jun 04, 2020 11:15 pm

dyqik wrote:
Thu Jun 04, 2020 10:51 pm
Related to the second question: timing of mass protest movements isn't planned in advance. As BoaF said above, the pandemic lockdowns and economic issues likely played a role in protests in the US kicking off now, raising tensions generally. Particularly with the highly visible heavily armed right wing protestors walking into State Houses without being bothered by the police.

The UK and US populaces are fairly tightly connected online, due to shared language. The tension in the US is clearly raising tensions in the UK as well.

That's not justification for protesting now in the UK (and please note that I haven't advocated for more protests to be held in the UK), but it's an explanation of some of the dynamics going on.
Oh, and in addition to this, the imagery of governments shutting down the economy for months to Edit: when white lives are also threatened, while having done nothing for decades to save black lives is pretty stark.
Last edited by dyqik on Thu Jun 04, 2020 11:20 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
dyqik
Princess POW
Posts: 7527
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:19 pm
Location: Masshole
Contact:

Re: Protesting during a pandemic (split)

Post by dyqik » Thu Jun 04, 2020 11:16 pm

lpm wrote:
Thu Jun 04, 2020 11:01 pm
EACLucifer wrote:
Thu Jun 04, 2020 10:41 pm
along with Why did the generally low risk student age organisers and protestors choose to encourage the riskiest possible behaviours when they could have called for safer protesting, eg silent vigils
There have been some dramatic socially distanced protests in other countries, with people standing on a 2 metre grid - Israel, Hague, Athens. Makes for great photos and got more attention due to the novelty.

The elegant protest of the doctors kneeling for PPE has already been posted.

Clapping for carers has been one of the country's most widespread ever expression of solidarity - nothing like it since the country's Princess Di mourning.

The spread of rainbow drawings by children is another expression of our society's shared goal - a visual statement that we all stand together.

Yet another march through London followed by inaudible speeches over a crappy sound system is a missed opportunity. Got little coverage as a result.
Oh, absolutely. There's stronger images that can be produced in safer ways.

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Princess POW
Posts: 10137
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: Portugal

Re: Protesting during a pandemic (split)

Post by Bird on a Fire » Thu Jun 04, 2020 11:52 pm

EACLucifer wrote:
Thu Jun 04, 2020 10:41 pm
I think most of us agree on that, too. The issue is not "was there a cold blooded murder of a black man by a police officer in the States, where almost a thousand people are killed a year by police, with black people disproportionately affected by this and by the prison-industrial complex", nor is it "are there problems of institutional racism in the UK including disproportionate interference by police in the lives of and indifference to the welfare of BAME people, as shown by events like the Grenfell fire". It is entirely possible to excoriate the organisers and attendees of the British protests while accepting and supporting those assessments of events, and the need for change as soon as possible and as fast as possible.

It's as follows;

If this is a response to events in the US - specifically the murder of George Floyd and the use of violence against peaceful vigils and protests - why is a very high risk protest needed in London, one of the worst hit cities in the world?

If this is about ongoing issues in the UK, why now? If this is, as some of those trying to justify their attendance have suggested, about Grenfell, why was it ok to wait nearly three years to go on the streets, but not to wait a little longer until their protest would not kill people?

along with Why did the generally low risk student age organisers and protestors choose to encourage the riskiest possible behaviours when they could have called for safer protesting, eg silent vigils
First off, I'm sorry that my initial response to you gave the impression that I don't think you support the protestors in general, and that I didn't acknowledge your particular circumstances that understandably affect how you respond to news about the pandemic. I know that you are anti-racist and that the pandemic is affecting you personally more than most.

The questions that you ask are fair ones, and I think would have been a much more interesting, and indeed pleasant, starting point for these discussions.

Some suggested partial responses:

If this is a response to events in the US - specifically the murder of George Floyd and the use of violence against peaceful vigils and protests - why is a very high risk protest needed in London, one of the worst hit cities in the world?
London's black community is one of the largest in Europe. I don't think it's surprising that a large black community would want to show solidarity with other black communities facing more serious oppression - for example the British black community campaigned against apartheid South Africa while the UK government supported the regime. I think when anyone is in a position of victimhood or suffering, knowing that others understand and support you has immense value.

None of that addresses the risk of coronavirus transmission, I know. I suspect that some of that comes down to priorities, weighing an acute threat against a chronic one isn't a simple calculation. Furthermore, London is so badly hit because the lockdown simply doesn't work there anyway.

People living in London are already allowed to go on the tube, the supermarket, etc, with little in the way of distancing and no mask-use enforced, recommended or commonplace. I know that attendees were encouraged to wear masks - my sister made two (so she could change), walked there and back (an hour each way) and said that in her bit of the protest people were generally at at least arm's length, except for when a car started driving into people's legs and a few folk rushed to stop it.

I can imagine thinking, probably naively, that it would be possible to attend without getting any closer to any more people than you would otherwise on a trip to the supermarket. It's not an enormous additional marginal risk given the more general failure of the government's strategy. I'm not in the UK any more, but from talking to my friends in various cities they are all obeying the lockdown otherwise. So the plan would have been turn up, walk at a distance in a mask, chant a bit, go home and continue isolating, especially from anyone vulnerable.

I can see the argument that any additional risk is too much, but I can also understand people thinking that adding their weight to a historic push for justice for themselves and their community was worth that risk.

If this is about ongoing issues in the UK, why now? If this is, as some of those trying to justify their attendance have suggested, about Grenfell, why was it ok to wait nearly three years to go on the streets, but not to wait a little longer until their protest would not kill people?
As you know, protesting and working for change is not just about being right. A lot of it comes down to marketing. The amount of support for racial justice in the media right now is unprecedented. It's been the first thing to knock the pandemic off the front pages, and before that the UK spent 3 years arguing about Brexit which carried its own set of issues about race and xenphobia that weren't explicitly focussed on black people.

I think Grenfell and the Windrush Scandal etcetera are used as examples of examples of the racism ingrained in UK society and governance, rather than intended to be sole justifications for attendance.

This was an incredibly rare opportunity. The temptation to capitalise on it is understandable, despite the circumstances.

Why did the generally low risk student age organisers and protestors choose to encourage the riskiest possible behaviours when they could have called for safer protesting, eg silent vigils
There certainly were some calls for safer practices. The pages for BLM London and BLM UK both include prominent instructions to wear a mask and practice social distancing (note that BLM UK is a separate group that wasn't in favour of the Trafalgar Square demo). Those calls weren't universally followed. The organisers should have seen that coming - crowds have a mind of their own.

I agree that they could have designed the protests to have safer practices to some extent, despite the limitations of time and the spaces available. They seem to have tried to adapt traditional protest methods rather than come up with something new.

I think the fact that most protestors were generally apparently low-risk is a good thing - it means that vulnerable people didn't feel pressured to risk their own health directly. I've no reason to suspect that they all went off to hug their grannies afterwards.

The event has probably had a small impact on community transmission amongst attendees and their immediate contacts - no disagreement from me there. Obviously we'll never know the size of it, due to the lack of testing. I hope that whatever additional measures vulnerable people in London have been taking to protect themselves are enough to keep them safe, because those measures would still be necessary if somebody they're in contact with went out to the shops.

AFAICT the real difference of opinion here is "how many supermarket-trips worth of additional risk is it to join a protest for black lives?" and I'm not convinced that the answer is a trivial as some are making out.
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Princess POW
Posts: 10137
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: Portugal

Re: Protesting during a pandemic (split)

Post by Bird on a Fire » Thu Jun 04, 2020 11:55 pm

dyqik wrote:
Thu Jun 04, 2020 11:15 pm
dyqik wrote:
Thu Jun 04, 2020 10:51 pm
Related to the second question: timing of mass protest movements isn't planned in advance. As BoaF said above, the pandemic lockdowns and economic issues likely played a role in protests in the US kicking off now, raising tensions generally. Particularly with the highly visible heavily armed right wing protestors walking into State Houses without being bothered by the police.

The UK and US populaces are fairly tightly connected online, due to shared language. The tension in the US is clearly raising tensions in the UK as well.

That's not justification for protesting now in the UK (and please note that I haven't advocated for more protests to be held in the UK), but it's an explanation of some of the dynamics going on.
Oh, and in addition to this, the imagery of governments shutting down the economy for months to Edit: when white lives are also threatened, while having done nothing for decades to save black lives is pretty stark.
There's also the imagery of business owners closing their businesses due to the protests (to protect their property) when they didn't close during the pandemic (to protect workers' lives). So much of this is bound up in general concerns about inequality, systemic injustice, political corruption, etc. - more so in the USA, but in the UK as well.

But yes - coronavirus has made it clear that when white people face the kind of existential threat that people of colour do, swift action can and will be taken to deal with it.
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.

User avatar
EACLucifer
Stummy Beige
Posts: 4177
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: In Sumerian Haze

Re: Protesting during a pandemic (split)

Post by EACLucifer » Fri Jun 05, 2020 2:02 am

Bird on a Fire wrote:
Thu Jun 04, 2020 11:55 pm
But yes - coronavirus has made it clear that when white people face the kind of existential threat that people of colour do, swift action can and will be taken to deal with it.
I'm sure the both of you think your rhetoric is somehow clever, but it isn't, and it is incredibly inaccurate. I realise you seem allergic to comparing the scope of things, but to put it into context, Ralph Leonard mentions here the number of deaths in the UK in police custody, and immediately following interaction with the police in England and Wales since 1990 as 1741. At the height of the first wave, coronavirus killed that many in two days. Both these numbers are for the population at large, and in both cases, BAME people are overrepresented in those killed. Coronavirus has, in the states, killed as many people in just a few months as it would take the American police a century to kill at current rates.

And while it was clear what kind of action was needed to contain coronavirus, swift action was not taken to deal with it. The pandemic was allowed to grow, mass gatherings were still permitted even as the horror was apparent in Italy and Spain. The British government's initial plan for dealing with it was to allow mass infection, with the burden of protecting the vulnerable to be placed entirely on the vulnerable.

User avatar
EACLucifer
Stummy Beige
Posts: 4177
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: In Sumerian Haze

Re: Protesting during a pandemic (split)

Post by EACLucifer » Fri Jun 05, 2020 2:20 am

Bird on a Fire wrote:
Thu Jun 04, 2020 11:52 pm
AFAICT the real difference of opinion here is "how many supermarket-trips worth of additional risk is it to join a protest for black lives?" and I'm not convinced that the answer is a trivial as some are making out.
This is the fundamental problem with your response - you are absolutely unwilling to actually look at the reality of these protests, and just what the risks were. There were thousands of people packing in down streets, at least one speech - John Boyega's - delivered with unmasked people packed around him. By all accounts it was a powerful speech, but with the reach of his name, it could have been delivered without directly and indirectly endangering lives. People were sharing in advance what the chants would be, not calls for silence or very careful arrangements to allow safe speeches for the sake of those present, and the wider community. The occasional cursory nod to social distancing did not translate into action, in contrast to many of the American protests.

Back in march, with coronavirus just beginning to spread in Washington state, a choir held a practise. Sixty people turned up, nobody was symptomatic, they avoided physical contact and used hand sanitiser. Several weeks later, three quarters of them had tested positive. Two died. That is the danger of singing, chanting and shouting right now.

User avatar
EACLucifer
Stummy Beige
Posts: 4177
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: In Sumerian Haze

Re: Protesting during a pandemic (split)

Post by EACLucifer » Fri Jun 05, 2020 2:22 am

EACLucifer wrote:
Fri Jun 05, 2020 2:02 am
Bird on a Fire wrote:
Thu Jun 04, 2020 11:55 pm
But yes - coronavirus has made it clear that when white people face the kind of existential threat that people of colour do, swift action can and will be taken to deal with it.
I'm sure the both of you think your rhetoric is somehow clever, but it isn't, and it is incredibly inaccurate. I realise you seem allergic to comparing the scope of things, but to put it into context, Ralph Leonard mentions here the number of deaths in the UK in police custody, and immediately following interaction with the police in England and Wales since 1990 as 1741. At the height of the first wave, coronavirus killed that many in two days. Both these numbers are for the population at large, and in both cases, BAME people are overrepresented in those killed. Coronavirus has, in the states, killed as many people in just a few months as it would take the American police a century to kill at current rates.

And while it was clear what kind of action was needed to contain coronavirus, swift action was not taken to deal with it. The pandemic was allowed to grow, mass gatherings were still permitted even as the horror was apparent in Italy and Spain. The British government's initial plan for dealing with it was to allow mass infection, with the burden of protecting the vulnerable to be placed entirely on the vulnerable.
Missed the edit window, forgot the link. Britain’s race pain is not the same as America’s - Ralph Leonard . It's very worth a read.

User avatar
dyqik
Princess POW
Posts: 7527
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:19 pm
Location: Masshole
Contact:

Re: Protesting during a pandemic (split)

Post by dyqik » Fri Jun 05, 2020 2:22 am

EACLucifer wrote:
Fri Jun 05, 2020 2:02 am
Bird on a Fire wrote:
Thu Jun 04, 2020 11:55 pm
But yes - coronavirus has made it clear that when white people face the kind of existential threat that people of colour do, swift action can and will be taken to deal with it.
I'm sure the both of you think your rhetoric is somehow clever, but it isn't, and it is incredibly inaccurate. I realise you seem allergic to comparing the scope of things, but to put it into context, Ralph Leonard mentions here the number of deaths in the UK in police custody, and immediately following interaction with the police in England and Wales since 1990 as 1741. At the height of the first wave, coronavirus killed that many in two days. Both these numbers are for the population at large, and in both cases, BAME people are overrepresented in those killed. Coronavirus has, in the states, killed as many people in just a few months as it would take the American police a century to kill at current rates.

And while it was clear what kind of action was needed to contain coronavirus, swift action was not taken to deal with it. The pandemic was allowed to grow, mass gatherings were still permitted even as the horror was apparent in Italy and Spain. The British government's initial plan for dealing with it was to allow mass infection, with the burden of protecting the vulnerable to be placed entirely on the vulnerable.
You've missed my point in these recent posts in response to your good questions here entirely. I'm not talking about protests in the UK, or whether any protests are wise, but about why these protests in the US have taken off.

User avatar
Gentleman Jim
Catbabel
Posts: 634
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 9:38 pm

Re: Protesting during a pandemic (split)

Post by Gentleman Jim » Fri Jun 05, 2020 9:07 am

Just a couple of point from my Black American wife:
Most here, I guess, are white and relatively well educated - so viewing thing from a point of privilege
Without being too nosey, are there any here that have been targets of this type of racism?

Oh and she almost misses the overt racism in the US as you know and expect it. Here (UK) it is far more underhand but no less real

eta She actually said more but is cross with me atm and wont clarify :lol:
Rules are for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools.

Squeak
Catbabel
Posts: 636
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2019 6:27 am

Re: Protesting during a pandemic (split)

Post by Squeak » Fri Jun 05, 2020 11:15 am

I'm sure I shall receive great acclamation and praise for my intelligence around here but I'm heading to our local protest tomorrow afternoon.

However, there's some important context. I live in a state that has closed its borders and hasn't had a new case of covid in three weeks. I also live in a country which has an appalling track record of police brutality towards indigenous Australians so it has very real meaning here.

There are plans for allies to stay in the background and to move through the protest space, rather than milling too long. If it looks as though people are being unsafe, I'll make sure to head back home.

tom p
After Pie
Posts: 1876
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:14 pm
Location: the low countries

Re: Protesting during a pandemic (split)

Post by tom p » Fri Jun 05, 2020 11:20 am

Gentleman Jim wrote:
Fri Jun 05, 2020 9:07 am
Just a couple of point from my Black American wife:
Most here, I guess, are white and relatively well educated - so viewing thing from a point of privilege
Without being too nosey, are there any here that have been targets of this type of racism?

Oh and she almost misses the overt racism in the US as you know and expect it. Here (UK) it is far more underhand but no less real

eta She actually said more but is cross with me atm and wont clarify :lol:
The people calling others stupid are talking about the protesters (both black and white) in london protesting the killing of george floyd by racist US cops the other day.
1. What effect will protesting in london have on US politics and US cop racism?
2. what effect will protesting in london *right now, during a pandemic that has already taken thousands of black lives* have on the communities where the protesters will go back to?
3. Even though the answer to 1 is obviously the square root of f.ck all, will she still be happy for the protests to have happened if Tottenham or Hackney have another big upsurge of coronavirus cases?
Or, more poignantly:
a. How many lives does she think will be saved by this protest?
b. How many lives lost because of this protest would be a price worth paying?
For me, anything greater than n (where n is the answer to question a) is unacceptable. Since n will be 0, then b has to be 0 too. Is the protest and the way it was held likely to cause 0 deaths? If the answer to that last question is no or 'i can't guarantee that', then the protest held in the way it was at this precise moment in time was unacceptable and the people who participated in that way were being stupid.

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Princess POW
Posts: 10137
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: Portugal

Re: Protesting during a pandemic (split)

Post by Bird on a Fire » Fri Jun 05, 2020 12:11 pm

tom p wrote:
Fri Jun 05, 2020 11:20 am
The people calling others stupid are talking about the protesters (both black and white) in london protesting the killing of george floyd by racist US cops the other day.
Anyone who thinks the London protests were wholly about the US police has no right to call anyone else stupid.
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Princess POW
Posts: 10137
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: Portugal

Re: Protesting during a pandemic (split)

Post by Bird on a Fire » Fri Jun 05, 2020 12:17 pm

EACLucifer wrote:
Fri Jun 05, 2020 2:02 am
Bird on a Fire wrote:
Thu Jun 04, 2020 11:55 pm
But yes - coronavirus has made it clear that when white people face the kind of existential threat that people of colour do, swift action can and will be taken to deal with it.
I'm sure the both of you think your rhetoric is somehow clever, but it isn't, and it is incredibly inaccurate. I realise you seem allergic to comparing the scope of things, but to put it into context, Ralph Leonard mentions here the number of deaths in the UK in police custody, and immediately following interaction with the police in England and Wales since 1990 as 1741.
Racism isn't just being shot by the police. There's a whole host of factors that lead to people feeling unsafe, losing opportunities, etc.
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.

User avatar
EACLucifer
Stummy Beige
Posts: 4177
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: In Sumerian Haze

Re: Protesting during a pandemic (split)

Post by EACLucifer » Fri Jun 05, 2020 12:44 pm

Bird on a Fire wrote:
Fri Jun 05, 2020 12:17 pm
EACLucifer wrote:
Fri Jun 05, 2020 2:02 am
Bird on a Fire wrote:
Thu Jun 04, 2020 11:55 pm
But yes - coronavirus has made it clear that when white people face the kind of existential threat that people of colour do, swift action can and will be taken to deal with it.
I'm sure the both of you think your rhetoric is somehow clever, but it isn't, and it is incredibly inaccurate. I realise you seem allergic to comparing the scope of things, but to put it into context, Ralph Leonard mentions here the number of deaths in the UK in police custody, and immediately following interaction with the police in England and Wales since 1990 as 1741.
Racism isn't just being shot by the police. There's a whole host of factors that lead to people feeling unsafe, losing opportunities, etc.
Yes. Oddly enough, pandemics do that too, including - especially in fact - in those communities these protestors purported to be supporting. Your soundbite was nonsense, and to suddenly decide that either the US or UK response to the pandemic can be summed up as " swift action can and will be taken to deal with it" is frankly gaslighting.

And nobody is saying these issues don't matter, we are saying that a cavalier disregard for those in danger from a pandemic that kills people orders of magnitude faster than the problem one is protesting is not a reasonable risk benefit analysis. Constantly flitting between discussion of solidarity with the US and saying it's about UK issues just distracts from the bl..dy point.

If it's about the US, why protest here in such a cavalier and dangerous way?

If it's about chronic issues in the UK, why wait until the middle of a pandemic and not the end of it to protest on the streets?

User avatar
EACLucifer
Stummy Beige
Posts: 4177
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: In Sumerian Haze

Re: Protesting during a pandemic (split)

Post by EACLucifer » Fri Jun 05, 2020 12:47 pm

Bird on a Fire wrote:
Fri Jun 05, 2020 12:11 pm
tom p wrote:
Fri Jun 05, 2020 11:20 am
The people calling others stupid are talking about the protesters (both black and white) in london protesting the killing of george floyd by racist US cops the other day.
Anyone who thinks the London protests were wholly about the US police has no right to call anyone else stupid.
You could always try responding to the rest of the post rather than ignoring it. The arithmetic holds up just as well if you substitute UK for US in his first point.

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Princess POW
Posts: 10137
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: Portugal

Re: Protesting during a pandemic (split)

Post by Bird on a Fire » Fri Jun 05, 2020 1:18 pm

I don't know why some people are struggling so much with the idea that a protest could have multiple motivations, or that its timing could be motivated by momentum in media coverage and popular attention.

And it isn't gaslighting to say that more action has been taken to counter the pandemic than structural racism. Yes, the UK's response has been wholly inadequate and mismanaged, which is a tragedy. Yes, that's partly because it's an acute crisis rather than a chronic one - but that should help you to understand why protests were organised to capitalise on a rare moment when racism presented an acute challenge to political leaders.
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.

User avatar
EACLucifer
Stummy Beige
Posts: 4177
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: In Sumerian Haze

Re: Protesting during a pandemic (split)

Post by EACLucifer » Fri Jun 05, 2020 1:32 pm

Bird on a Fire wrote:
Fri Jun 05, 2020 1:18 pm
I don't know why some people are struggling so much with the idea that a protest could have multiple motivations, or that its timing could be motivated by momentum in media coverage and popular attention.

And it isn't gaslighting to say that more action has been taken to counter the pandemic than structural racism. Yes, the UK's response has been wholly inadequate and mismanaged, which is a tragedy. Yes, that's partly because it's an acute crisis rather than a chronic one - but that should help you to understand why protests were organised to capitalise on a rare moment when racism presented an acute challenge to political leaders.
You didn't say "more action", you said "swift action can and will be taken".

And you keep saying "why don't people understand..." and yet it is fairly clear we do. We just don't agree with the risks they are not just taking, but imposing on the public, especially on the communities they purport to represent. This entire blowup occured because you insisted on tone policing a very vulnerable person who has been directly harmed by the pandemic who was concerned about increased risks and harm. The people getting frustrated with your inability to get the point are quite aware it's not just about one thing or another thing, but given the likely small at best - and remember, protests can be counterproductive - effects of the UK protests do not come close to justifying the risks, especially not given the protestors refusal to even slightly modify their protest to protect lives.

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Princess POW
Posts: 10137
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: Portugal

Re: Protesting during a pandemic (split)

Post by Bird on a Fire » Fri Jun 05, 2020 1:47 pm

EACLucifer wrote:
Fri Jun 05, 2020 1:32 pm
You didn't say "more action", you said "swift action can and will be taken".
Indeed, and it was. I didn't say "sufficient action", which wasn't.
EACLucifer wrote:
Fri Jun 05, 2020 1:32 pm
And you keep saying "why don't people understand..." and yet it is fairly clear we do.
I'm afraid that's not as clear as you think.

lpm and tom p have repeatedly made posts showing that they think the London protests were solely about George Floyd, which isn't even true of the US protests.

I read your bolded questions as being alternatives to each other. If you intended to imply that they could both be true simultaneously I'm afraid that didn't come across to me (but could be my error of reading).
EACLucifer wrote:
Fri Jun 05, 2020 1:32 pm
We just don't agree with the risks they are not just taking, but imposing on the public, especially on the communities they purport to represent.
It's stuff like this that keeps getting under my skin. The protestors clearly do represent parts of those communities. You keep saying "claim to" and "purport to" as if you don't think the protests are legitimate.
EACLucifer wrote:
Fri Jun 05, 2020 1:32 pm
This entire blowup occured because you insisted on tone policing a very vulnerable person who has been directly harmed by the pandemic who was concerned about increased risks and harm. The people getting frustrated with your inability to get the point are quite aware it's not just about one thing or another thing, but given the likely small at best - and remember, protests can be counterproductive - effects of the UK protests do not come close to justifying the risks, especially not given the protestors refusal to even slightly modify their protest to protect lives.
Tone in conversations about racism and responses to it is an important issue, though, as it is with any disadvantaged group. I apologise again for not considering your personal circumstances, but as far as I'm aware they don't apply to other people making similar points in this thread.
EACLucifer wrote:
Fri Jun 05, 2020 1:32 pm
especially not given the protestors refusal to even slightly modify their protest to protect lives.
Again, why repeat things you know are untrue? Constantly exaggerating does not give the impression of somebody giving the protestors a fair hearing.
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.

tom p
After Pie
Posts: 1876
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:14 pm
Location: the low countries

Re: Protesting during a pandemic (split)

Post by tom p » Fri Jun 05, 2020 2:04 pm

Bird on a Fire wrote:
Fri Jun 05, 2020 12:11 pm
tom p wrote:
Fri Jun 05, 2020 11:20 am
The people calling others stupid are talking about the protesters (both black and white) in london protesting the killing of george floyd by racist US cops the other day.
Anyone who thinks the London protests were wholly about the US police has no right to call anyone else stupid.
Why hold them now? Why? Now?
That. Is. What. Is. f.cking. Stupid.
The time to protest was in Nov/Dec to remind everyone of the Tories racist policies and try to prevent racist Johnsin winning tha majority he did. Don't wait until some yank pigs murder a man on camera then protest during a f.cking pandemic. And don't pretend that it's all about everything. If it's about everything then grow the f.ck up and don't risk spreading a killer disease and killing your nan or someone else's.
One can be sympathetic to someone's aims, while still thinking their actions stupid, for example I am sympathetic to your views, but your posts in this thread are utterly moronic.

Bewildered
Fuzzable
Posts: 257
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 2:51 pm

Re: Protesting during a pandemic (split)

Post by Bewildered » Fri Jun 05, 2020 2:09 pm

Some random comments on this thread
- I am afraid that the protests will lead to a significant number of deaths and i would not have attended in UK, and wish they did not happen
- OTOH, like squeak, I might attend one in Australia where the context is very different because the incidence is very low, not sure just now and depends on how it’s organised, as of its badly done with many attending could still lead to a large growth. Feel free to offer informed commentary on this.
- I am already taking part in another way of protesting publicly that avoids gatherings and any risk.
- When I read EACL’s post my initial reaction was to feel pretty uncomfortable with it, seemed inappropriately dismissive and insulting
- I felt like boaf was expressing this and I agreed with what he was saying, and didn’t think he was being racist in even a technical way, just saying don’t be so insulting about choices made weighing two factors when you lack the experience to know how heavy one side is.
- I hated many of dyqiks’s and maybe other people’s posts at EACL after this, as I felt he was being told he was racist and then that he had no right to defend himself and should stop. The rhetoric seemed hyperbolic, unfair and a bit nasty.
- I thought the post comparing Dominic Cummings Defense about experience was a relevant and valid point, and made me think about my opinion on the experience. But here’s my conclusion. I don’t think I was thinking or calling Dominic Cummings an idiot for what he did and I don’t think that defense was put forward to defend him from insults like that. I do appreciate that i don’t share his experience of being a parent in such circumstances and I have plenty of sympathy for someone making a choice like that. But it was still against the law and still a bad example from someone in his position and still almost certainly put others at risk. They fired people whose expertise might have actually saved lives in the pandemic because the opinion (presumably from the experts themselves as well) was that the mixed message risked more lives. So I wouldn’t call him an idiot for this but do want him sacked and don’t think the defense was a good one from him being sacked.
- i didn’t understand why dyqik and other people wanted the thread split at the time, but actually I think that worked really well and was a good idea now I see it. Both threads are better this way.

Post Reply